A Common Human Problem Has a Name: Misokinesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Misokinesia –– or the ‘hatred of movements’ –– is a psychological phenomenon that is defined as a strong negative affective or emotional response to the sight of someone else’s small and repetitive movements, such as seeing someone mindlessly fidgeting with a hand or foot. Among those who regularly experience misokinesia, there is a growing recognition of the challenges that it presents, as evidenced by blossoming on-line support groups. Yet surprisingly, scientific research on the topic is lacking. This article is novel in systematically examining whether misokinesia exists in the non-clinical population and if there are observable individual variability in the intensity or extent of reported misokinesia sensitivity in the general population. Across three studies that included 4100 participants, we confirmed the existence of misokinesia as a phenomenon in a non-clinical population, with approximately one-third of our participants self-reporting some degree of misokinesia sensitivity to the repetitive, fidgeting behaviors of others as encountered in their daily lives. Moreover, variability in the range of misokinesia sensitivities showed that the negative social-affective impacts that one experiences may grow with age. This study shows that a large population of the public may be suffering from something that has received little formal recognition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".