ArticleScientific reports2024
Predicting attitudes toward ambiguity using natural language processing on free descriptions for open-ended question measurements.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Semantics Analysis for Scale Development: Replicating Psychometrics Validation Process with Large Language Models.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Human Expertise and Large Language Model Embeddings in the Content Validity Assessment of Personality Tests.Educational and psychological measurement · 2026Article
- Decoding the mind of self-compassion through a topic modeling analysis of 9000+ free-text narratives.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Advancing psychological assessment: quantifying self-compassion through free-text responses and language model BERT.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Individual traits and reactions to ambiguity differ and are conceptualized in terms of an individual's attitudes toward ambiguity or ambiguity tolerance. The development of natural language processing technology has made it possible to measure mental states and reactions through open-ended questions, rather than predefined numerical rating scales, which have traditionally been the dominant method in psychological research. This study presented three ambiguity-related situations and responses collected online from 591 participants in an open-ended format. After the analysis with bidirectional encoder representations from transformers, correlations were calculated using scores from the numerical evaluation by conventional questionnaire, and a significant moderate positive correlation was found. Therefore, this study found that attitudes toward ambiguity can be measured using an open-ended response method of reporting everyday life states. It is a novel methodology that can be expanded to other scales in psychology and can potentially be used in educational and clinical situations where participants can be asked to respond with minimal burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.