MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415856584 · doi:10.31031/pprs.2025.09.000708

Love and Culture, and How they Affect Each Other: A Commentary

2025· article· W4415856584 on OpenAlexaff
Ami Rokach

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Psychotherapy Research Study · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)Perspective (graphical)PerceptionAction (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Love, while a universal phenomenon, is significantly influenced by culture, race and ethnicity.This commentary highlights that connection.While love is now seen as universal, Americans have commonly be concerned and occupied with love.At the beginning of the 21 st century, anthropologists, clinical psychologists, communication studies, developmental psychologists, evolutionary psychologists, social psychologists, and sociologists, among others, are exploring the nature of love.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.014
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0350.038
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology and Psychotherapy Research StudySame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207