MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402912299 · doi:10.1167/jov.24.10.251

The Influence of Adult Relationship Attachment Style on the Networks of Attention

2024· article· en· W4402912299 on OpenAlexaff
Ralph Redden, Jack Lukeman, Veda Haggarty

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStyle (visual arts)PsychologyArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Relationship attachment style has been found to influence performance associated with two of the three networks of attention. Adaptations to information processing for individuals with insecure attachment styles are thought to be a result of increased vigilance to external threats. Attachment avoidance has been shown to influence the executive network of attention, wherein individuals higher in attachment avoidance show reduced interference in the standard Eriksen Flanker task. Attachment anxiety has been shown to influence the executive network as well, in addition to the orienting network of attention, wherein individuals higher in attachment anxiety show larger endogenous cueing effects. The current study was designed to replicate these prior findings, and to examine the heretofore untested relationship between attachment styles and the alerting network of attention, all in a single task. AttentionTrip is an engaging, gamified version of the Attention Network Task, played on an iPad tablet. Observers pilot a ship through a tunnel, using helpful signals (spatial and temporal) to prepare for upcoming targets. The correct weapon must be used to destroy targets, which can be flanked congruently or incongruently by distractors. As in previous work, attachment styles were assessed using the Experience in Close Relationships-Revised Questionnaire. Across individuals, robust network scores were observed for each network of attention. Attachment styles modulated the network effects in the same manner as previously observed, although the sizes of the effects of attachment appear to be smaller in our task. Pertaining to the relationship between attachment and the alerting network, no statistically significant finding was observed. However, individuals with insecure attachment showed slightly faster overall aggregate RTs, lending additional support to the hypothesis that adaptations to attention due to insecure attachment are a consequence of increased vigilance.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.367 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vision→Same topicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics→French-language works237,207→