MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950795683 · doi:10.51657/ric.v4i1.40992

Concept of Will as an Open Problem in Culture-Historical Context

2017· article· en· W2950795683 on OpenAlex
Nataliya N. Tolstykh

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue internationale du CRIRES innover dans la tradition de Vygotsky · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology of Development and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppropriationProcess (computing)EpistemologyContext (archaeology)Cognitive scienceControl (management)Subject (documents)PsychologyCognitionSociologyComputer scienceNeurosciencePhilosophyHistoryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Outlines a new approach to the problem of development of will, emanating from the tradition of thought represented by Vygotsky and Bozhovich. The main conceptual de-velopment lies in drawing a distinction between two concepts – will (volya) and goal appropriation, self-regulation, executive cognitive control of behavior (proyzvolnost’). Both concepts emphasize the readiness and ability of an individual to pursue a goal. The distinction lies in the nature of that goal determination. In will, it is self generated and comes from the inner world of the individual while in goal appropriation, it is determined by an external source but is readily appropriated. A such distinction is supported by re-cent findings in neuroscience which describe the actualization of di˙erent brain structures depending on whether an individual acts upon will or willingly submission. Hence, the personality development is considered as a process of will development in which will and goal appropriation inter plays and progresses in specific stages paving the way for subjunctivization or becoming a true subject of that culture.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.885

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.300 · 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