MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Evidence on Trust and Well-Being

2017· book· en· W2492883793 on OpenAlexafffund
John F. Helliwell, Haifang Huang, Shun Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2017
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsEuropean Social SurveyWorld Values SurveyTrustworthinessParliamentSurvey data collectionUnemploymentSocial trustValue (mathematics)Psychological resiliencePoliticsPolitical scienceEconomicsSocial psychologyPsychologySocial capitalStatisticsEconomic growthLawMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data from three large international surveys—the Gallup World Poll, the World Values Survey and the European Social Survey—are used to estimate income-equivalent values for social trust, with a likely lower bound equivalent to a doubling of household income. Second, the more detailed and precisely measured trust data in the European Social Survey (ESS) are used to compare the effects of different types of social and political trust. While social trust and trust in police are most important, there are significant additional benefits from trust in three aspects of the institutional environment: the legal system, parliament and politicians. The total well-being value of a trustworthy environment is estimated to be larger than that flowing from social trust alone. Third, the ESS data show that being subject to discrimination, ill-health or unemployment is much less damaging to those living in trustworthy environments. These resilience-increasing features of social trust hence lessen well-being inequality by channeling the largest benefits to those at the low end of the well-being distribution.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.674
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.243 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations67
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207