MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295376133 · doi:10.2501/jar-2015-006

Accounting for Social-Desirability Bias in Survey Sampling

2015· article· en· W2295376133 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

VenueJournal of Advertising Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicSurvey Sampling and Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsAdvantage Forensics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial desirabilityAccountingSampling (signal processing)Social desirability biasSurvey researchBusinessReporting biasMarketingPsychologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceMEDLINEComputer scienceBusiness administrationTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advertising Research Foundation FoQ 2 Initiative Leaders George Terhanian The NPD Group, Inc., george.terhanian{at}npd.com Christopher Bacon Advertising Research Foundation, chris{at}thearf.org Gian Fulgoni comScore, Inc., gfulgoni{at}comscore.com Survey research heavily relies on

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)0.078
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.127
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score0.949

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0780.127
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.826
GPT teacher head0.585
Teacher spread0.241 · 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