Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this work is to introduce the phenomenon of compassion from the aspect of psychology. The theoretical part of the diploma thesis presents efforts made up to now to define compassion from a psychological point of view. The theoretical part of this work deals with the description of compassion in terms of evolutionary, social psychology and neuroscience. Based on the theoretical assumption that the relationship of a person towards himself or herself and towards other people is interconnected, this work also focuses on a description of a psychological construct of self-compassion. The empirical part of the diploma thesis is devoted to the translation of a new self-evaluation questionnaire called the Multidimensional Compassion Scale from USA, and the verification of the psychometric characteristics of the questionnaire and its convergent and discriminant validity. For the sake of questionnaire verification, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) was used, as well as the Interpersonal reactivity Index (IRI), a dimension called Compassionate reaction to one's own experiences from the Self-compassion Scale (SCS-26-CZ) questionnaire, and a dimension called Nonjudging intrapsychic experiences from the Five Aspects of Mindfulness Questionnaire (DPAV). Items of low difficulty were found within...
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".