Günter Krampen & Han s-Werner Wahl Geropsychology and Psychology in the Last Quarter of the 20th Century Geropsychology and Psychology in the Last Quarter of the 20th Century Bibliometrical Results for the German-Speaking Versus Anglo-American Research Co
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents bibliometrical results on the development of geronto-psychology in the last quarter of the 20th century. Analyses are based on the psychology literature documented in PsycINFO, covering mainly publications from the Anglo-American region, and PSYNDEX, covering publications from the German-speaking countries, for the years 1977 to 2000. Results show that both literature bodies on gerontopsychology have steadily grown, in absolute terms, since the beginning of the last quarter of the 20th century. The geropsychology literature in the German-speak-ing countries has grown faster than the Anglo-American literature. In terms of a relative frequency view, the findings support the notion that geropsychology has found a clear and stable position within psychology as a whole in both research communities, contributing 1–3 % to the over-all psychology literature and 8–15 % (PsycINFO) respectively 30–50% (PSYNDEX) to the overall developmental psychology literature since 1978.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | low |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".