MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7103141183 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/pu8z3

Cultural Differences in Daily Regulatory Focus, Affect and Goal Pursuit

2024· other· W7103141183 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2024
Typeother
Language
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGoal pursuitAffect (linguistics)ModerationCultural diversityAssociation (psychology)Activities of daily livingCultural activities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates cultural differences in motivational processes in daily goal pursuit among 120 participants (60 Korean, 60 Canadian). We use over 10 daily life assessments of participants’ goal pursuits, feelings, and motivational orientations. We will examine cultural moderation of the association between daily motivation and well-being.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.016
Scholarly communication0.0220.004
Open science0.0180.013
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.030

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.311 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Science FrameworkFrench-language works237,207