MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414218730 · doi:10.1111/spc3.70082

Self‐Expansion Theory: Origins, Current Evidence, and Future Horizons

2025· article· en· W4414218730 on OpenAlexafffund
Lydia F. Emery, Erin K. Hughes, Amy Muise

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial and Personality Psychology Compass · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersYork University
KeywordsRomanceFocus (optics)Core (optical fiber)Key (lock)Psychological TheoryEmpirical research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Self‐expansion theory is one of the first psychological theories of love, and arguably the first to focus on how romantic relationships influence a person's sense of self. Over the past 40 years, a robust literature has supported the notion that people are motivated to expand their self‐concepts, and romantic relationships are a central avenue for self‐expansion. In this paper, we revisit the origins of self‐expansion theory to determine how well the literature has tested its original tenets and identify key ideas that remain unexplored. We then review the current empirical literature, discuss how core constructs have been operationalized, highlight untested aspects of the original theory, and describe an agenda for future work.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.708
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.399 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial and Personality Psychology CompassSame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207