MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169258761 · doi:10.1177/1948550613490964

When the Going Gets Tough

2013· article· en· W2169258761 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. A. Wohl, Nyla R. Branscombe, Jamey J. Lister

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Psychological and Personality Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalience (neuroscience)RoulettePsychologyGame of chanceEconomicsEconomic riskControl (management)Social psychologyActuarial scienceCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined the impact of anticipating poor economic conditions on financial risk taking. In Experiment 1, the salience of poor future economic prospects was manipulated among young adults. Those who were reminded of their poor future economic prospects were more likely to take the opportunity to gamble with their money than those in the control condition. In Experiment 2, we once again manipulated the salience of poor economic prospects. Extending the results of Experiment 1, participants who were reminded of their poor economic prospects bet more money on a spin of a roulette wheel than those in a control condition. Importantly, we show that the relationship between poor economic prospects and gambling is mediated by belief in the necessity of taking financial risks to make money. Implications of economic downturns for gambling and other forms of risk taking are discussed.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.303
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations58
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Psychological and Personality ScienceSame topicDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsFrench-language works237,207