MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6977030254 · doi:10.60692/d4rhk-41930

The Blursday Database: Individuals' Temporalities in Covid Times

2021· article· en· W6977030254 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdsorption and Cooling Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemporalitiesPersonalityCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicTime perceptionDuration (music)PerceptionIsolation (microbiology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Covid-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns triggered worldwide changes in the daily routines of human experience. The Blursday database provides measures of subjective time and related processes from more than 2,800 participants (over 9 countries) tested on 14 questionnaires and 15 behavioral tasks during the Covid-19 pandemic. The easy-to-process database and all data collection tools are made fully accessible to researchers interested in studying the effects of social isolation on temporal information processing, time perspective, decision-making, sleep, metacognition, attention, memory, self-perception, and mindfulness. Blursday also includes vital quantitative statistics such as sleep patterns, personality traits, psychological well-being, and lockdown indices. Herein, we exemplify the use of the database with novel quantitative insights on the effects of lockdown (stringency, mobility) and subjective confinement on time perception (duration, passage of time, temporal distances). We show that new discoveries are possible as illustrated by an inter-individual central tendency effect in retrospective duration estimation.

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)0.014
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicAdsorption and Cooling SystemsFrench-language works237,207