MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119597150 · doi:10.29173/eureka28753

Tale of Two Frames

2020· article· en· W3119597150 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEureka · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral Health and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
FundersYork University
KeywordsFraming (construction)AutonomyKinesiologyPsychologyPhysical activitySocial psychologyHealth promotionSignificant differenceDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePhysical therapyPublic healthEngineeringNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Physical activity has been shown to decrease the risk of a variety of diseases. However, recent studies indicate that only 15% of Canadian adults engage in adequate levels of physical activity. As such, an area of interest for physical activity promotion has been the use of persuasive messages, specifically, the use of framing effects as a method of persuasive communication. This study uses the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to investigate the effects of framed health messages on autonomous motivation.
 Methods. 107 York University undergraduate students (N=107; 51 females, 56 males) ages 18 – 30 were recruited from the school of Kinesiology and Health Sciences. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three message groups: gain-framed, loss-framed and control. They were given and instructed to read the messages. Afterwards, the participants’ autonomous motivation levels were measured.
 Results. 68.2% of the participants were considered physically active. No significant difference in autonomous regulation levels were observed between the three frame groups. However, a significant interaction was shown between participants’ gender and frame condition; among the female participants, levels of autonomous regulation were significantly higher in the loss frame group, when compared to the control group.
 Conclusion. Based on the results of this study, women who were exposed to loss-framed messages tended to demonstrate higher levels of autonomy. Similar framing effects were not evident in males.

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 categoriesInsufficient 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0080.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.334 · 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