How communication context impacts judgments of a potential peer mentor
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
Disclosure is a critical element of interpersonal relationships and individuals are often evaluated on what they share with others, whether in personal, professional, or learning contexts. Technology now allows for many different outlets for communicating with other people. We used experimental methods to explore the impact of communication medium (i.e. print diary, online diary, blog, or email) on psychosocial perceptions of a potential peer mentor. Female participants gave more positive mentor ratings on likeability, likeliness to disclose to the mentor, and perceived closeness than did males, but not on judgments of the mentor’s privacy. Participants judged the mentor to be more private when they viewed the print diary than in the online conditions and when reading the online diary than the blog (the least private condition). We also found that women were more likely to reciprocate disclosure when they viewed disclosures in the print condition than in the blog.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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