Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jeffrey V. Butler of EIEF and University of Nevada, Las Vegas reviews “Experimenting with Social Norms: Fairness and Punishment in Cross-Cultural Perspective”, by Jean Ensminger and Joseph Henrich. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Seventeen papers, plus thirteen case studies available for download only, explore the historical emergence of prosocial norms and their relationship to economic growth. Papers in the text discuss theoretical foundations─the coevolution of social norms, intrinsic motivation, markets, and the institutions of complex societies; cross-cultural methods, sites, and variables; major empirical results─markets, religion, community size, and the evolution of fairness and punishment; and double-blind dictator games in Africa and the United States─differential experimenter effects. Case studies available for download discuss Hadza behavior in three experimental economic games; the effects of sanctions and third-party enforcers on generosity in Papua New Guinea; an experimental investigation of dictators, ultimatums, and punishment; behavioral experiments in the Yasawa Islands, Fiji; economic game behavior among the Shuar; economic experimental game results from the Sursurunga of New Ireland, Papua New Guinea; Maragoli and Gusii farmers in Kenya─strong collective action and high prosocial punishment; sharing, subsistence, and social norms in Northern Siberia; the influence of property rights and institutions for third-party sanctioning on behavior in three experimental economic games; cooperation and punishment in an economically diverse community in highland Tanzania; social preferences among the people of Sanquianga in Colombia; the effects of birthplace and current context on other-regarding preferences in Accra; and prosociality in rural America─evidence from dictator, ultimatum, public goods, and trust games.” Ensminger is Edie and Lew Wasserman Professor of Social Sciences at the California Institute of Technology. Henrich is Professor and Canada Research Chair in Culture, Cognition, and Coevolution in the Economics and Psychology Departments at the University of British Columbia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.511 | 0.507 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".