MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7164936274 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/9fjrm

Explaining Unusual Events

2025· other· W7164936274 on OpenAlexaff
Jessy-Lee Lacher, Leanne ten Brinke

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2025
Typeother
Language
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativePersonalityEvent (particle physics)Big Five personality traitsIdeation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores if psychopathic personality traits are associated with conspiracy ideation in response to unusual events. Specifically, participants will complete a Qualtrics survey where they will encounter four hypothetical news events. They will be prompted to share how they explain each event in written responses. Trained research assistants will rate how much these explanations conform to characteristics of conspiracies. For example, how complex and distrustful these narratives are. We expect that participants high in psychopathic personality traits will create narrative explanations for unusual events that are high in these characteristics.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.023
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0450.024
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0920.138

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Science FrameworkFrench-language works237,207