Bibliographic record
Abstract
professor of psychology at the University of Delaware, is the author of an innovative and engaging textbook on research methodology.Morling (2018) makes a distinction between the roles of research consumers and research producers.Undergraduate science students are research consumers; they learn and read about research to understand the topics, phenomena, and methodologies within their disciplines.For example, psychology students may learn about how autobiographical memory works, how we pay attention to social information, how cultural worldviews help people manage anxiety about death, or what neuroimaging tells us about the visual attention system.Undergraduate science students are also research producers.Through their coursework, labs, independent studies, honors theses, and other research opportunities, they frequently develop new research questions, and conduct their own investigations to answer those questions.For example, some psychology students engage in research investigating the socialization of cultural practices, or how decision-making changes as a function environment.Others many conduct research on the development of executive function in childhood, or how learning and cognitive abilities allow animals to solve problems they face in the wild.Of course, there are connections between the consumer and producer roles: both share a desire for knowledge, and a faith in empiricism (Morling, 2018).In addition, when developing new research questions, hypotheses, and methodologies, research producers routinely review prior research to inform their own investigations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".