MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139262047 · doi:10.1002/bdm.620

Sex differences when searching for a mate: A process‐tracing approach

2008· article· en· W2139262047 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Behavioral Decision Making · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMate choiceModerationPsychologyTerm (time)Sample (material)Social psychologyBiologyEcologyMating

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sex differences in the extent of mate search were investigated using two sequential choice processes. In Study 1, attribute search, prior to choosing a mate or rejecting two competing mates, for either a short‐ or long‐term relationship, was explored. Men (women) seeking short‐term relationships were the least (most) likely to reject both suitors. Men acquired a greater number of attributes prior to rejecting mates. The length of the relationship solely affected men's search behaviors. Study 2 utilized a nested sequential model namely participants decided how many suitors to sample prior to choosing a short‐term mate, and how many attributes to acquire on each sampled suitor. Women sampled a greater number of suitors prior to choosing a mate. Biological sex was found to be a greater moderator of mate search than were three personality traits linked to search. Across both studies less information was acquired prior to rejecting versus choosing a mate. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.156
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it