MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159294915 · doi:10.1002/per.655

Personality characteristics of research volunteers

2007· article· en· W2159294915 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Personality · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaAcademy of Finland
KeywordsAgreeablenessConscientiousnessPsychologyPersonalityExtraversion and introversionNeuroticismBig Five personality traitsClinical psychologyHierarchical structure of the Big FiveSiblingSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We evaluated Big Five personality factor differences between research volunteers and nonvolunteers. In the first study, 158 military officers were asked to participate in a mail survey. The personality scores of the officers were available from an archival data set. In our second study, adult siblings from large families were invited to participate in extensive clinical epidemiological evaluations. The personality scores of volunteers (N = 55) and nonvolunteers from the same families (N = 29) were estimated from sibling ratings made by those who participated in the study. In both studies, respondents, compared to nonrespondents, were found to be significantly lower in Neuroticism and higher in Conscientiousness. The second study further indicated respondents as being higher in Extraversion and Agreeableness. Copyright © 2007 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)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.293 · 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