MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Moral Identity Development

2020· reference-entry· en· W3005142781 on OpenAlexaff
Sam A. Hardy, Tobias Krettenauer, Natasha Hunt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicIdentity, Memory, and Therapy
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)Moral developmentSocial cognitive theory of moralityNarrativePersonalityMoral disengagementNarrative identitySociologyLife spanSocial psychologyMoral psychologyPsychologyIdentity formationMoral reasoningEpistemologySelf-conceptAestheticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Moral identity theory and research emerged in the early 1980s and the field has grown ever since. In this chapter, the authors begin by reviewing the history of work on moral identity. They provide a framework for thinking about moral identity grounded in McAdams’s three levels of personality: traits, characteristic adaptations, and live narratives. Then the authors review research on moral identity development across the life span at these three levels of personality. Next, they review work on contexts of moral identity development, based on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model: family, peers, schools, communities, cultures, media, and religion. Last, the authors outline five questions for future research.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.020

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIdentity, Memory, and TherapyFrench-language works237,207