MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2214818522 · doi:10.1177/147470490900700307

Effects of Context and Relative Rank on Mate Choice and Affiliation Ratings

2009· article· en· W2214818522 on OpenAlex
Peter Honey, Chad D. Coulombe

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

VenueEvolutionary Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominance (genetics)PsychologySocial psychologyMate choiceRank (graph theory)Affect (linguistics)Context (archaeology)RecreationEcologyCommunicationMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Female dominance has not often been studied as a factor in mate choice and other social interactions. When it has been examined, there have been a number of conflicting findings. The present study was designed to clarify interpretations of a study conducted by Brown and Lewis (2004) that found that men prefer subordinate women in a workplace context. We presented participants with information about the relative rank of physically attractive targets, in two very different contexts (work-related and recreational). We found that the context in which rank cues are presented has an impact on affiliation ratings, but that cues of rank do not affect mate choice ratings. Future studies of effects of dominance must take into account the context in which they are presented, and recognize that rank may not be a sufficient indicator of dominance for the purpose of mate choice by both men and women.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.316 · 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