MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038926928 · doi:10.1111/spc3.12552

An agenda for psychological distance apart from construal level

2020· article· en· W3038926928 on OpenAlexafffund
Sam J. Maglio

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial and Personality Psychology Compass · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConstrual level theoryImmediacyOddsPsychologyConstrualsSocial psychologySet (abstract data type)BannerSpace (punctuation)Social distanceCognitive psychologyComputer scienceEpistemologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Mental life is not confined to physical reality. Instead, anchored in the here and now, people can conjure worlds set in other locations, in other times, from other people's perspectives, and with otherworldly odds. These routes away from immediacy represent different dimensions of psychological distance—space, time, social distance, and probability—in that they all provide a means by which targets of consideration can feel psychologically distant. Though largely developed under the theoretical banner of construal level theory, psychological distance benefits from consideration in its own, independent right. This review proposes that prominent characteristics of it inform an agenda for translational insights across the four dimensions of psychological distance.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.030
Scholarly communication0.0070.016
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.496
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.002 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial and Personality Psychology CompassSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207