MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794684867 · doi:10.1177/1046496418765678

The Effect of Group Size and Synchrony on Pain Threshold Changes

2018· article· en· W2794684867 on OpenAlex
Zachary Lewis, Philip Sullivan

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

VenueSmall Group Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyAnalysis of varianceThreshold of painRepeated measures designFactorial experimentGroup effectClinical psychologyMedicineAnesthesiaInternal medicineStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synchronization of behavior has repeatedly been shown to increase pain threshold, which is understood to be an indicator of endorphin activity. Although Weinstein et al. found that large and small groups showed the same effect, to date no study has manipulated group size to determine if it has an effect on change in pain threshold. Thirty-three participants rowed two 20-min time trials under two counterbalanced conditions—paired and large group. Pain threshold was assessed before, immediately post, 5-min post, and 10-min post each session. A repeated-measures (3 × 2) factorial ANOVA revealed a significant interaction between condition and time. Specifically, there was a significantly higher pain threshold in the large group than in the paired condition after 10 min of exercise.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.678
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.307 · 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