Imitation of Alcohol Consumption in Same-sex and Other-sex Dyads
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
AIM: Being exposed to other people's drinking behavior has been demonstrated to influence individual's drinking levels. Imitation of alcohol consumption has mainly been investigated among same-sex drinking partners. This study examined whether imitation of alcohol consumption differs when people drink with same-sex or other-sex partners. METHOD: To test the imitation effects, a two (drinking condition: alcohol versus no alcohol) by two (sex constellation of dyad: same-sex versus other-sex) mixed between-within subject design was used. In two separate sessions situated in a naturalistic drinking setting (i.e., a bar laboratory), 66 participants were exposed to a same-sex and an other-sex model (i.e., a confederate) who consumed either alcoholic or non-alcoholic beverages. We expected that men would imitate more when drinking with women and men, and that women would imitate less when drinking with men. RESULTS: Imitation of alcohol consumption did not differ when participants were drinking with same-sex partners compared with other-sex partners. No gender differences in imitation were found. CONCLUSION: Imitation of alcohol consumption can be generalized to situations in which people drink with other-sex partners. Men and women seem to imitate regardless of their drinking partner's sex.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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