MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2302332173

Birth order and gender: investigating its effects on agreeableness, Conscientiousness, openness, aspiration and empathy.

2015· article· en· W2302332173 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ololade Olayemi Taiwo

Bibliographic record

VenueeSource (Dublin Business School) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgreeablenessConscientiousnessOpenness to experiencePsychologyEmpathyHierarchical structure of the Big FiveSocial psychologyPersonalityBig Five personality traitsDevelopmental psychologyExtraversion and introversion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This aim of this study is to investigate Adlerian birth order effects and gender on empathy and aspiration as well as certain personality elements; openness, conscientiousness and agreeableness. The study consisted of female (N = 53) male (N = 27) DBS students with a total (N = 80). A quantitative design was used through a questionnaire comprising of three scales, The Aspiration Scale (Schmuck, Kasser, & Ryan (2000), a modified Big Five index (John et al 1991) and The Toronto Empathy questionnaire (Spreng et al 2009). Demographics required age, gender and birth classification. An ANOVA found significant difference between birth groups and openness but not for aspiration, empathy, conscientiousness and agreeableness. Significant Correlations were found between agreeableness and empathy and with openness and aspiration, finally a two-way ANOVA found significant birth category and gender interaction effects with Conscientiousness and empathy, no interaction effects were found for other variables. Author Keywords: Birth order, personality, aspiration, adler, empathy, conscientiousness, openness, agreeableness.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.249
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeSource (Dublin Business School)Same topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207