MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319274105 · doi:10.1177/2041386611434655

Third party responses to justice failure

2012· article· en· W2319274105 on OpenAlex
Luke Zhu, Jason P. Martens, Karl Aquino

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

VenueOrganizational Psychology Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPunitive damagesEconomic JusticeCompensation (psychology)Identity (music)Social psychologyMeaning (existential)Procedural justicePsychologySocial identity theoryPolitical scienceLawSocial groupPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a model that explores the consequences of justice failure. We conceptualize justice failure as a threat to meaning and suggest belief in a just world and justice climate as two moderators for the proposed relationship. We propose that individuals react to justice failure by engaging in fluid compensation and that third parties are more likely than victims of justice failure to engage in this process. We further propose that identity influences individuals’ reaction to justice failure such that individuals high in moral identity are more likely to affirm their moral domain than other domains. As a result of fluid compensation, we finally propose that individuals who affirm their moral domain are (a) more likely to act morally and less likely to act immorally (b) more punitive towards others who violate social norms and (c) more supportive of corporate social responsibility programs. Implications and future research directions are discussed.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.011

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.379
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