MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388927230 · doi:10.3758/s13428-023-02283-2

Denver pain authenticity stimulus set (D-PASS)

2023· article· en· W4388927230 on OpenAlexaff
E. Paige Lloyd, Kevin M. Summers, Christopher A. Gunderson, Rachael Weesner, Leanne ten Brinke, Kurt Hugenberg, Allen R. McConnell

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavior Research Methods · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
KeywordsCodebookStimulus (psychology)PsychologyFacial expressionPerceptionSet (abstract data type)Social psychologyComputer scienceCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceCommunicationNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce the Denver Pain Authenticity Stimulus Set (D-PASS), a free resource containing 315 videos of 105 unique individuals expressing authentic and posed pain. All expressers were recorded displaying one authentic (105; pain was elicited via a pressure algometer) and two posed (210) expressions of pain (one posed expression recorded before [posed-unrehearsed] and one recorded after [posed-rehearsed] the authentic pain expression). In addition to authentic and posed pain videos, the database includes an accompanying codebook including metrics assessed at the expresser and video levels (e.g., Facial Action Coding System metrics for each video controlling for neutral images of the expresser), expressers' pain threshold and pain tolerance values, averaged pain detection performance by naïve perceivers who viewed the videos (e.g., accuracy, response bias), neutral images of each expresser, and face characteristic rating data for neutral images of each expresser (e.g., attractiveness, trustworthiness). The stimuli and accompanying codebook can be accessed for academic research purposes from https://digitalcommons.du.edu/lsdl_dpass/1/ . The relatively large number of stimuli allow for consideration of expresser-level variability in analyses and enable more advanced statistical approaches (e.g., signal detection analyses). Furthermore, the large number of Black (n = 41) and White (n = 56) expressers permits investigations into the role of race in pain expression, perception, and authenticity detection. Finally, the accompanying codebook may provide pilot data for novel investigations in the intergroup or pain sciences.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0830.010

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 head0.486
GPT teacher head0.639
Teacher spread0.153 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavior Research MethodsSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207