MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312371827 · doi:10.1177/0146167216637843

Smiling on the Inside

2016· article· en· W2312371827 on OpenAlexaff
Marina Schall, Sarah E. Martiny, Thomas Goetz, Nathan C. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychologyExpression (computer science)Developmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although expressing positive emotions is typically socially rewarded, in the present work, we predicted that people suppress positive emotions and thereby experience social benefits when outperformed others are present. We tested our predictions in three experimental studies with high school students. In Studies 1 and 2, we manipulated the type of social situation (outperformance vs. non-outperformance) and assessed suppression of positive emotions. In both studies, individuals reported suppressing positive emotions more in outperformance situations than in non-outperformance situations. In Study 3, we manipulated the social situation (outperformance vs. non-outperformance) as well as the videotaped person's expression of positive emotions (suppression vs. expression). The findings showed that when outperforming others, individuals were indeed evaluated more positively when they suppressed rather than expressed their positive emotions, and demonstrate the importance of the specific social situation with respect to the effects of suppression.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations41
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality and Social Psychology BulletinSame topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207