MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399679459 · doi:10.1515/humor-2023-0116

Let’s entertain others: the relationship between comic styles and the histrionic self-presentation style in Polish, British, and Canadian samples

2024· article· en· W4399679459 on OpenAlexaffabout
Agnieszka Fanslau, Michał Olech, Piotr Kałowski, Katarzyna Branowska, Anna Zarazińska, Melanie Glenwright, Lauren McGuinness, Natalia Banasik‐Jemielniak

Bibliographic record

VenueHumor - International Journal of Humor Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHumor Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComicsStyle (visual arts)Presentation (obstetrics)PsychologyArtVisual artsLiteratureMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract People who have the histrionic self-presentation style (HSP) demonstrate certain As-If-behaviors, involving pretense and role play, in their daily interactions to seek attention and amuse others. Doing As-If may be closely related to humor behaviors, so we examined this relationship in greater detail by using the Comic Style Markers (CSM) in Polish, English, and Canadian samples (N = 285, 383, and 305, respectively; M age = 20.85, SD = 5.35). We expected that the HSP might be related to fun, wit, and satire due to their pretense-based characteristics. We confirmed configurational, metric, and scalar invariance for the As-If-Scale (AIS) and the CSM in the three samples, which allowed for cross-cultural comparisons. As expected, the HSP was positively associated with fun, wit, and satire. Additionally, men scored higher on the AIS, but no cross-country differences were found.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.225
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumor - International Journal of Humor ResearchSame topicHumor Studies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207