MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167586171 · doi:10.1177/1046496414537689

The Role of Simmelian Friendship Ties on Retaliation within Triads

2014· article· en· W2167586171 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

VenueSmall Group Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCarnegie Mellon University
KeywordsFriendshipPsychologySocial psychologyTriad (sociology)CategorizationReciprocity (cultural anthropology)Third partyInterpersonal tiesSocial exchange theoryEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the effect of friendship in triads on retaliatory responses to unfair outcomes that originate from a group member. Drawing on Simmel’s classic discussion of relationships in social triads versus dyads, we hypothesized that the effect of unfairness on retaliation between friends is stronger when the third party in the triad is a mutual friend, rather than a stranger. We also draw on social categorization theory to hypothesize that the effect of unfairness on retaliation between strangers is stronger when the third party is a friend of that stranger than when the triad consists of all strangers. Hypotheses were tested in an experiment where participants negotiated with one another in a three-person exchange network. The results supported our hypothesis that between friends, the increase in retaliation was stronger following an unfair deal when third parties were mutual friends, rather than strangers.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.311
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.298 · 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