MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Self-Knowledge

2013· book· en· W4246449553 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle M. Bauer, Roy F. Baumeister

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2013
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrospectionReciprocalSelf-knowledgePerceptionPsychologySelfInterpersonal communicationSocial psychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter broadly addresses the following question: How do people gain knowledge about the self, and is this knowledge accurate and unbiased? To answer this question, we discuss pathways to self-knowledge that involve intrapsychic processes related to introspection and self-perception and interpersonal processes that involve the self in its interaction with the social world. We further expose some of the biases and underlying motives that shape people’s search for self-knowledge via these pathways. Specifically, we consider how the biased processing of self-relevant information as well as the varied ways in which people engineer their social world can influence how people perceive and present themselves, and how they are perceived by others. Over time, the reciprocal forces inherent in the search for self-knowledge conspire to give rise to a subjective sense of self that may be experienced as true and unadulterated, notwithstanding possible evidence to the contrary.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207