MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038405821 · doi:10.1177/1069397120938690

Implications of Culturally Implicit Perspective of Emotional Intelligence

2020· article· en· W3038405821 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

VenueCross-Cultural Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotional Intelligence and Performance
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)ModerationAntecedent (behavioral psychology)PsychologyEmotional intelligenceConstruct (python library)Cultural intelligenceSocial psychologyResource (disambiguation)Cognitive psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes a culturally implicit perspective of emotional intelligence and introduces the notion of culture-specific emotional intelligence (CSEI). Emotional intelligence (EI) as a construct has predominantly been associated with the individual. Given that emotions are also implicit beliefs and that their experience, expression, and management are known to be driven by cultural values, we suggest EI to be culturally embedded. We therefore suggest that EI is culture-specific. Culture-specific EI serves as an important social resource affecting behaviors. We provide a brief review of literature that elucidates the multi-level nature of EI and highlights the role of culture as both antecedent and moderator of CSEI. Implications for theory and cross-cultural phenomena are discussed.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.271
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.281 · 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