MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Temporal Orientation Changes Due to COVID-19 Pandemic: A Machine Learning Text Analysis

2025· article· en· W4416002034 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Li, Song Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological and Temporal Perspectives Research
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientation (vector space)TrajectoryEvent (particle physics)Baseline (sea)Period (music)Deep learningLongitudinal data

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines how temporal orientation evolves over time, changes at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and in the period following the pandemic’s onset. Based on event system theory, we claim that the onset of the pandemic creates a strong event because it is highly novel, disruptive, and critical. Applying machine learning text analysis technique, this study extracted past, present, and future temporal orientation out of a total of 2,502,748 tweets, from 3979 individuals over 78 months. Discontinuous Growth Modeling framework is then used to test the baseline trajectory temporal orientation, how COVID-19 causes immediate changes that diverge from the baseline trajectory at the onset of the pandemic, and what is the long-lasting recovery effect after the occurrence of the pandemic. Results showed that (a) all the three aspects of temporal orientations evolve over time before the event, (b) there were immediate increases or decreases in each temporal orientation at the onset of the pandemic, and (c) longitudinal recovery effects last for a long run after the pandemic. Moreover, age explained individual differences of all these change processes. Theoretical contributions to temporal orientation literature and event system theory were discussed. Methodological advancements such as the use of big data and machine learning text analysis were also discussed.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicPsychological and Temporal Perspectives ResearchFrench-language works237,207