MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185197525 · doi:10.2117/psysoc.2021-b014

A REEXAMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF CULTURE AND DOPAMINE D4 RECEPTOR GENE INTERACTION ON SOCIAL ORIENTATION

2021· article· en· W3185197525 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keiko Ishii, Takahiko Masuda, Masahiro Matsunaga, Yasuki Noguchi, Hidenori Yamasue, Yohsuke Ohtsubo

Bibliographic record

VenuePSYCHOLOGIA · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
KeywordsNoveltyInterdependencePsychologyNovelty seekingSocial psychologySocial relationDevelopmental psychologyGeneticsBiologySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dopamine D4 receptor gene (DRD4) is associated with novelty-seeking and risk-taking behaviors that have had an adaptive value in the history of human migration. It also plays a role in moderating the extent to which people adhere to cultural norms and practices. The aim of this study was to replicate previous findings about how DRD4 polymorphism interacts with cultural differences in social orientation, which revealed Westerners’ emphasis on independence and East Asians’ emphasis on interdependence. Testing Japanese and European Canadian undergraduates (n = 784), we succeeded in replicating these previous findings: the Canadian students were more independent, whereas the Japanese students were more interdependent. However, none of the interaction effects between culture and DRD4 were significant. Implications for candidate gene research investigating gene–environment and gene–culture interactions are discussed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePSYCHOLOGIASame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207