The COVID-19 pandemic as autobiographical period: evidence from an event dating study
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 COVID-19 Pandemic is undoubtedly one of the most impactful and ubiquitous public events in recent history. In this study, we focused on how it affected the organisation of autobiographical memory by examining how often individuals referred to the COVID-19 Pandemic while estimating the date of their autobiographical memories. To that end, we collected word-cued memories from the recent past, event dating protocols, COVID-relatedness ratings, and the transitional impact scores from first-year undergraduates. We found that participants frequently recalled COVID-related memories, and often used the Pandemic as a temporal landmark for dating both COVID-related and unrelated memories. Importantly, reference to the Pandemic in dating estimates was as frequent as the references to other important life periods (high school, university). Despite affecting the lives of these individuals only moderately in psychological and material terms, these data indicate that the Pandemic has become a prominent landmark in autobiographical memory, shaping the way we remember and situate past experiences.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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