Strategic regulation of memory in dsyphoria: a quantity-accuracy profile analysis
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
The mechanisms underlying a tendency among individuals with depression to report personal episodic memories with low specificity remain to be understood. We assessed a sample of undergraduate students with dysphoria to determine whether depression relates to a broader dysregulation of balancing accuracy and informativeness during memory reports. Specifically, we investigated metamnemonic processes using a quantity-accuracy profile approach. Recall involved three phases with increasing allowance for more general, or coarse-grained, responses: (a) forced-precise responding, requiring high precision; (b) free-choice report with high and low penalty incentives on accuracy; (c) a lexical description phase. Individuals with and without dysphoria were largely indistinguishable across indices of retrieval, monitoring, and control aspects of metamemory. The results indicate intact metacognitive processing in young individuals with dysphoria and provide no support for the view that impaired metacognitive control underlies either memory deficits or bias in memory reports that accompany dysphoria.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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