MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1643861865 · doi:10.1111/caje.12117

Job market signalling, stereotype threat and counter‐stereotypical behaviour

2015· article· en· W1643861865 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Richard Chisik

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNames, Identity, and Discrimination Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersRyerson University
KeywordsStereotype (UML)PoolingSocial psychologyProductivityPsychologyStatistical discriminationDistribution (mathematics)Variance (accounting)Stereotype threatLabour economicsEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract I introduce stereotype threat in a multiple‐productivity signalling model. Existence of multiple self‐fulfilling stereotypes, which can generate statistical discrimination, is more likely if there is less variance in the ability distribution. A low endogenously correct stereotype about a group forces higher‐ability group members to choose a higher‐productivity and a higher separating signal, thereby engaging in counter‐stereotypical behaviour. This counter‐stereotypical behaviour causes the remaining partially pooling group to have lower average productivity, reinforcing the negative stereotype. The co‐existence of stereotype threat and counter‐stereotypical behaviour can explain the simultaneity of lower wages and higher education attainment in a group facing labour‐market discrimination.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.232
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.033 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique→Same topicNames, Identity, and Discrimination Research→French-language works237,207→