Time-dependent mood fluctuations in Antarctic personnel: a meta-analysis
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 The third-quarter phenomenon is the dominant theoretical model to explain the psychological impacts of deployment in Antarctica on personnel. It posits that detrimental symptoms to functioning, such as negative mood, increase gradually throughout deployment and peak at the third-quarter point, regardless of overall deployment length. However, there is equivocal support for the model. The current meta-analysis included data from 21 studies (involving 1,826 participants) measuring negative mood during deployment to elucidate this discrepancy. Across studies analyses were conducted on three data types: stratified by month using repeated-measured all time points meta-analytic techniques and pre/post-deployment data for summer/winter deployment seasons. Our results did not support the proposed parameters of the third-quarter phenomenon, as negative mood did not peak at the third-quarter point (August/September) of deployment. Overall effect sizes indicated that negative mood was greater at baseline than the end of deployment for summer and winter deployment seasons. These findings have theoretical and practical implications and should be used to guide future research, assisting in the development and modification of pre-existing prevention and intervention programmes to improve well-being and functioning of personnel during Antarctic deployment.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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