MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313440063 · doi:10.29173/cjfy29870

The Perception of Intimacy: Are Dating Reality TV Shows Affecting Relationships?

2023· article· en· W4313440063 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jojo Boateng

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la Jeunesse · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourtshipReality tvPerceptionPsychologyTheme (computing)Social psychologySociologyComputer scienceMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A common theme that has emerged in relationship literature is the effect that TV reality shows have on determining one's perception and engagement in intimacy. For instance, the introduction of technology has shifted the way we participate in courtship practices. Now, individuals use mediums, such as dating apps, to find a partner and engage in intimacy. However, this discussion has ignored other mediums, such as TV shows, that center intimacy and relationships. In this article, we explore how the emergence of dating reality TV shows has shaped the way we perceive intimacy and engage in dating behaviours, answering the question: how are dating reality TV shows affecting relationships?

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.268 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la JeunesseSame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207