MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611906394

Stoicka teoria emocji i jej recepcja w psychologii Alberta Ellisa

2015· article· pl· W2611906394 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCeON Repository (Centre for Evaluation in Education and Science) · 2015
Typearticle
Languagepl
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stoicyzm bywa postrzegany jako postawa polegająca na tłumieniu emocji, dlatego wielką zasługą niektórych nurtów w psychologii XX wieku było przypomnienie, że można inaczej odczytać filozofię Portyku. Stoicyzm jawi się wówczas nie jako represjonowanie, ale hermeneutyka emocji. Co więcej, w ramach tego odczytania zaproponowano również metodologię, która pozwoliła ponownie wybrane stoickie dogmata zastosować w praktyce. Mowa tu głównie o psychologii poznawczej, która podchodzi do emocji w sposób szczególnie bliski perspektywie stoickiej. W niniejszym artykule postaram się zaprezentować psychologiczną recepcję stoicyzmu na przykładzie tak zwanej racjonalno-emotywnej behawioralnej terapii Alberta Ellisa.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.341 · 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