Role of motivation to respond to provocation, the social environment, and trait aggression in alcohol‐related aggression
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little attention has been paid to the motivation to respond to provocation and to the interaction between this motivation, alcohol, the drinking environment, and individual characteristics. Undergraduates at six Canadian universities (N = 1,232) read three vignettes describing conflict situations with social environmental manipulations while imagining themselves as either sober or intoxicated. Self-ratings assessed likelihood of assertive and aggressive responses and motivational indices of anger, offensiveness of the instigator's actions, and importance to respond to the provocation. Respondents also completed a measure of trait aggression. Multi-group structural equation models supported the hypothesis that perceived likelihood of reactive aggression is influenced by perceived alcohol intoxication, gender, trait aggression, social environmental factors, and motivation to respond to the provocation. In addition, a number of interactions were found among the predictors. These results provide insight into the types of factors that may influence aggression in drinking situations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it