The Role of Meeting Size in Attendees' Psychological Response and Consequence Behavior: A Social Anxiety Approach
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 research was to examine the effects of meeting size on attendee experience at association meetings. From perspectives of social anxiety, this research investigates how meeting size influences attendees' social anxiety levels; how attendees' perceived self-esteem and group identity at meetings moderate the effects of meeting size on social anxiety; and how attendees' perceived social anxiety influences their satisfaction with meeting attendance and perceived return-on-investment (ROI) of the meeting. With a survey of 470 attendees, results showed that the bigger the meetings are, the less social anxiety attendees will feel. The impact of meeting size is further moderated by self-esteem and group identity. Furthermore, attendees' felt social anxiety negatively affects their meeting satisfaction and perceived ROI of the meeting. Theoretical and practical contributions of the research 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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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