Shared Stressful Situations and Affiliation in Stranger Dyads: An experimental Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to the tend-and-befriend theory, shared stressors may create situations in which the inclination to interact with another person (i.e., immediate affiliative desire) is elevated. This may create a situational context in which sustained affiliative responses towards an interaction partner are more likely to occur in the longer-term. In the present study, we randomly assigned 85 undergraduate stranger dyads (N = 170 participants; all women) to either shared stress or shared control experiences and measured immediate affiliative desire. The strangers in the dyads then interacted with one another in a discussion task, and participants’ long-term affiliative responses (liking and future intentions to affiliate) were assessed. The evidence suggested that shared stressful experiences (vs. the shared control experiences) promoted significantly more immediate affiliative desire. Furthermore, immediate affiliative desire mediated the association between shared stress and long-term affiliative responses. These findings offer insight into how shared stress may influence friendship development.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".