MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307895006 · doi:10.1037/xge0001313.supp

Supplemental Material for Egocentric Anchoring-and-Adjustment Underlies Social Inferences About Known Others Varying in Similarity and Familiarity

2022· article· en· W4307895006 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Wang, Austin J. Simpson, Andrew R. Todd

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Psychology General · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnchoringPsychologySimilarity (geometry)Cognitive psychologySocial psychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stimuli 50 Items on Preferences and Habits (Original Set Administered in Experiments 1 and 6)1. Spend an afternoon looking through childhood mementos 2. Go to the movies 3. Spend an hour in a coffee shop with friends 4. Spend half an hour texting with a friend 5. Do a crossword puzzle 6. Go out to a night club 7. Eat a piece of chocolate cake 8. Sing karaoke with some friends 9. Run on a treadmill at the gym for 30 minutes 10.Spend an hour reading a best-selling novel 11.Likes to have ice cubes in a glass of water 12. Spend an afternoon playing video games 13.Play a game of pool at a local bar 14.Throw a birthday party for a friend 15.Take a yoga class 16.Talk on the phone with a family member 17.Visit the dentist for a check-up 18.Like water more than juice 19.Spend half an hour browsing a friend's photos on social media 20.Make a late-night pizza run 21.Go over to a friend's to play a new video game 22. Re-arrange the furniture in your home 23.Go bowling with friends 24.Sample some cookies that a friend baked 25.Spend an hour organizing your closet 26.Spend the whole day in pajamas 27.Create a playlist with some of your favorite songs 28.Chew gum 29.Drink coffee 30.Watch a reality TV show 31.Like peanut-butter and banana sandwiches 32.Like to attend music concerts 33.Play charades with some friends at home 34.Like taking the train 35.Do laundry regularly 36.Generally have a positive outlook on life 37. Play a board game with some friends 38.Read a comic book 39.Recognize a movie star walking around town 40.Like Coke more than Pepsi 41.Watch a romantic comedy 42.Change the background image on your cellphone 43.Get your hair cut regularly 44.Help a neighbor move to a new place on the other side of town

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.622
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6220.081

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Psychology GeneralSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207