MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ideas capitales en finanzas: del pasado al futuro

2006· article· en· W37263170 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBolsa: revista mensual de bolsas y mercados españoles · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAccounting and Financial Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de Moncton
KeywordsCapital (architecture)HumanitiesArtEconomicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mind wandering has often been studied in relation to psychopathology. However, debates remain as to whether sluggish cognitive tempo, recently termed cognitive disengagement syndrome (CDS), and ADHD symptoms could be unique predictors of mind wandering. Therefore, this study was aimed at documenting the associations between CDS, ADHD symptoms and mind wandering while controlling for age, sex, internalized symptoms, and sleep. A sample consisting of university students (N = 60; aged between 17 and 32 years; 65% female) completed measures of CDS, ADHD symptoms, internalized functioning and insomnia. Mind wandering was also assessed using the 5-item Mind Wandering Questionnaire (MWQ) and thought sampling during a reading task. Multiple regression analyses show that while younger age and inattention were significant predictors of greater levels of self-reported mind wandering on the MWQ, sex, CDS, hyperactivity/impulsivity, internalized symptoms, and sleep were not. In addition, no variables were able to significantly predict spontaneous and deliberate mind wandering as assessed by thought sampling. These findings raise important questions regarding the equivalence between measures of state-level and trait-level mind wandering. The associations between ADHD, CDS and mind wandering in young adults are still unclear, but our findings highlight critical methodological considerations for future studies that might further our understanding of the relationship between task-unrelated thought and psychopathology.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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