Relationship social comparison interpretations and dating relationship quality, behaviors, and mood
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Social comparisons are common in dating relationships. We examined individuals' cognitive interpretations (e.g., hope for the future or one's own relationship is not doing well) after an upward, downward, or lateral social comparison to a friend's dating relationship. Exploratory factor analyses indicated three factors in the Relationship Social Comparison Interpretation scale ( RSCI ): negative interpretations, positive upward interpretations, and positive downward interpretations (Studies 1 and 2). Hierarchical regressions controlling for comparison direction and individual differences in relationship social comparison orientation indicated that the RSCI was associated with relationship satisfaction, commitment, and positive and negative affect (Studies 1 and 2). There were also direct and indirect effects (through relationship quality) of the RSCI , with attention to alternatives and accommodation behaviors (Study 2).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it