MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7114892670 · doi:10.3390/mca30060136

Integrating Emotion-Specific Factors into the Dynamics of Biosocial and Ecological Systems: Mathematical Modeling Approaches Accounting for Psychological Effects

2025· article· en· W7114892670 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical and Computational Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMemory and Neural Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlliance de recherche numérique du Canada
KeywordsBiosocial theoryPerceptionPopulationCognitionToolboxEcological psychologyAffect (linguistics)Behavioural sciences

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding how emotions and psychological states influence both individual and collective actions is critical for expressing the real complexity of biosocial and ecological systems. Recent breakthroughs in mathematical modeling have created new opportunities for systematically integrating these emotion-specific elements into dynamic frameworks ranging from human health to animal ecology and socio-technical systems. This review builds on mathematical modeling approaches by bringing together insights from neuroscience, psychology, epidemiology, ecology, and artificial intelligence to investigate how psychological effects such as fear, stress, and perception, as well as memory, motivation, and adaptation, can be integrated into modeling efforts. This article begins by examining the influence of psychological factors on brain networks, mental illness, and chronic physical diseases (CPDs), followed by a comparative discussion of model structures in human and animal psychology. It then turns to ecological systems, focusing on predator–prey interactions, and investigates how behavioral responses such as prey refuge, inducible defense, cooperative hunting, group behavior, etc., modulate population dynamics. Further sections investigate psychological impacts in epidemiological models, in which risk perception and fear-driven behavior greatly affect disease spread. This review article also covers newly developing uses in artificial intelligence, economics, and decision-making, where psychological realism improves model accuracy. Through combining these several strands, this paper argues for a more subtle, emotionally conscious way to replicate intricate adaptive systems. In fact, this study emphasizes the need to include emotion and cognition in quantitative models to improve their descriptive and predictive ability in many biosocial and environmental contexts.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematical and Computational ApplicationsSame topicMemory and Neural MechanismsFrench-language works237,207