MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2932773092 · doi:10.1002/soej.12351

Hierarchy Leadership and Social Distance in Charitable Giving

2019· article· en· W2932773092 on OpenAlex

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

VenueSouthern Economic Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHierarchyProsocial behaviorSocial psychologySocial hierarchySocial identity theoryIdentity (music)PsychologyTransformational leadershipField (mathematics)Political scienceSocial groupMathematicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates the effect of hierarchy leadership and social distance on prosocial behavior in a field experimental setting of sequential charitable giving conducted in an organization. The treatments vary in whether the leading (first) donor's identity is revealed to the following donors as a hierarchy leader, a peer, or a stranger. The followers' giving in the Leader and Peer treatments responds positively to the leader's giving, but no significant response is found in the Stranger treatment. However, on average, the followers in the Leader treatment give less than those in both the Peer and Stranger treatments. This is due to a negative effect on the followers' giving when the leaders contribute a small amount in the Leader treatment.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.247 · 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