Feigning Symptoms to Obtain Prescription Stimulants: A Vignette-Based Study on Its Conditions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This vignette-based study examined the willingness to feign symptoms to obtain a prescription following an analysis on who might use prescription stimulants to enhance performance ( N = 3,468). It experimentally manipulated three factors: the social disapproval of prescription stimulant use for enhancement purposes, the physicians’ diagnostic efforts, and the medical condition (attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and narcolepsy); respondent characteristics of self-control, personal morality, and self-efficacy were also measured. Our results showed that social disapproval of prescription drug use, a personal morality that disapproves of drug use, high self-control, and high self-efficacy were negatively associated with the willingness to use. Willingness increased especially in situations of social approval when there was a stronger personal approval of drug use, or surprisingly when physicians’ diagnostic efforts were higher. The feigning willingness was lower in situations of social disapproval and when personal morality disapproved of feigning. Thus, personal and situational characteristics are relevant to understand both behaviors.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it