MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124155106

Exploring the Significance of Emotion for Mediation Practice

2013· article· en· W3124155106 on OpenAlexaff
Cheryl A. Picard, Janet Siltanen

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConflict Management and Negotiation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMediationJournaling file systemPsychologyReflexivityCompetence (human resources)Exploratory researchRubricSocial psychologyPedagogyComputer scienceSociologyComputer file
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors report on their exploratory study examining the learning process embedded in mediation. Their research procedures involved directed reflexive journaling followed by group discussions to generate insights into how mediation practitioners experience learning in mediation. The significance and role of emotion emerged as central to the dynamic of this learning process. The research indicates that the experience of positive and negative emotions attached to learning needs to be allowed and attended to within the mediation dynamic. This suggests that mediation practitioners need the competence to follow and understand their own learning-attached emotions as well as those of the parties.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.303
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicConflict Management and NegotiationFrench-language works237,207