MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744973251 · doi:10.1111/spc3.12341

Wisdom in a complex world: A situated account of wise reasoning and its development

2017· article· en· W2744973251 on OpenAlex
Henri C. Santos, Alex C. Huynh, Igor Grossmann

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial and Personality Psychology Compass · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSituatedSet (abstract data type)PsychologyInterpersonal communicationTraitMotivated reasoningEmpirical evidencePoliticsSituated cognitionState (computer science)EpistemologySocial psychologyComputer sciencePolitical scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Social issues (e.g., partisan politics, economic decisions, and interpersonal conflicts) often involve trade‐offs, necessitating the consideration of multiple interests. Such issues do not have simple answers and benefit from wise reasoning—a set of metacognitive strategies that guide people toward managing complexity and balancing different interests. We review recent advances in research on wise reasoning, including evidence pertinent to the question of wisdom's trait‐like and state‐specific features, how it varies across situations, and how one can develop it. Overall, empirical studies suggest that researchers can understand wisdom better by paying attention to its situated nature across time and contexts.

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)0.002
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 score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.380
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.122 · 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