MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404074520 · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2024.104688

Narcissistic vigilance to status cues

2024· article· en· W4404074520 on OpenAlexaff
Breanna E. Atkinson, Erin A. Heerey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Social Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyVigilance (psychology)Social psychologyCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Humans often take decisive action to influence their social environments, including their own position within a social hierarchy. Those who are highly motivated by status attainment may be especially prone to such activity. Here, we ask whether desire for social status contributes to the early detection of social stimuli, and more specifically, whether it plays a role in which environmental stimuli are consciously detected. We used a Rapid Serial Visual Presentation task to examine vigilance to status-relevant versus non-status-relevant stimuli, and asked whether measure of narcissism, a personality trait strongly associated with a drive for status attainment, moderated people's task responses. Results showed that when task stimuli were status relevant, self-reported narcissism moderated stimulus processing such that as participants reported higher levels of narcissism, the likelihood that they would recognize these rapidly presented words increased if they were status relevant, but not if the stimuli were non-status-relevant. These results suggest that the motivations that underpin personality traits, for example the drive to seek social status associated with narcissism, may play a formative role in the early processing and detection of social stimuli, thereby shaping people's social behaviour.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.405 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental Social PsychologySame topicPersonality Traits and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207