MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2624277314 · doi:10.1163/15685306-12341449

A Longitudinal Study of the Relation between Acquiring a Dog and Loneliness

2017· article· en· W2624277314 on OpenAlex
Nikolina M. Duvall Antonacopoulos

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

VenueSociety and Animals · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessPsychologyLongitudinal studyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This longitudinal study examined the effect of acquiring a dog using both an indirect and a direct measure of loneliness. The loneliness levels of 31 adults who acquired a dog and a control group of 35 non-dog guardians (non-dog owners) were assessed at baseline and 8 months. Results revealed that changes in loneliness over time differed for the two groups when loneliness was assessed through a 1-item direct measure. Participants who acquired a dog experienced reduced loneliness levels from baseline to 8 months and were less lonely at 8 months than non-dog guardians, even though the two groups did not differ at baseline. On the other hand, when loneliness was assessed through a multi-item indirect measure, acquiring a dog had no effect on loneliness. These results highlight the importance of the type of measure used to assess loneliness when examining changes in loneliness following the acquisition of a companion animal.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.385
Teacher spread0.324 · 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