MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2488797884 · doi:10.1111/fare.12195

Qualities of Character That Predict Marital Well‐Being

2016· article· en· W2488797884 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

VenueFamily Relations · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicForgiveness and Related Behaviors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKindnessHumilityPsychologyGenerositySocial psychologyForgivenessCompassionCharacter (mathematics)PerceptionProsocial behaviorInterpersonal relationshipDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing body of literature has examined relations among qualities of character—or marital virtues—and marital outcomes. Results of past research have suggested positive relations between qualities such as generosity, kindness, and forgiveness, and marital well‐being. We expand on previous research by examining relations between three qualities of character and marital satisfaction with 1,513 respondents randomly selected from three states. Specifically, we examined the effects of participants' perceptions of their partners' humility, compassion, and positivity on their own marital satisfaction. Results indicated statistically significant, positive associations between each of these qualities and marital satisfaction, although results vary by gender. Furthermore, a statistically significant interaction effect suggested that spousal humility may be a protective factor against marital stress among women. Implications for practice and program development 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.129
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)0.0030.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.260 · 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