MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312922081 · doi:10.1177/0013916516637648

Place Attachment Enhances Psychological Need Satisfaction

2016· article· en· W2312922081 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Behavior · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPlace Attachment and Urban Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaRoyal Roads University
KeywordsPlace attachmentPsychologyAttachment theoryMeaning (existential)Social psychologyInsecure attachmentScale (ratio)Developmental psychologyPsychotherapistGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Attachment to place may contribute to individuals’ well-being. We evaluated whether visualizing a place of attachment (compared with visualizing a nonattached familiar place) could increase the satisfaction of key psychological needs. Place attachment visualizations increased participants’ levels of self-esteem, meaning, and belonging. Furthermore, visualizing places at a certain geographical scale helped to improve meaning, self-esteem, and belonging among participants who had been ostracized. This is the first study to treat place attachment as an independent variable in an experimental design, so it broadens the options for internally valid, methodologically diverse place attachment research.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.295 · 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