How Academics View Conservative Protestants
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A sizable body of research has demonstrated an anti-conservative Christian perspective among academics. Our research explores academics' negative attitudes toward conservative Protestants. We asked academics to rate Protestant Christian groups, and then explain their ratings, how they define mainline, evangelicals, and fundamentalist Protestants, and articulate the differences between various Protestant groups. Identifying as conservative Protestant and intergroup contact with conservative Protestants best predict less antipathy toward conservative Protestants. Analysis of open-ended questions indicates three groups of academics: Conservative Protestant Critics, Theological Definers, and Low Information. Conservative Protestant Critics envision conservative Protestants as intolerant, unscientific enemies to be openly opposed. Theological Definers are fairly supportive of evangelicals and project an image of objective assessment toward them. Low Information respondents do not have much knowledge of or interest in conservative Protestants. Ultimately, symbolic boundaries and lack of intergroup contact reinforce an academic identity that dismisses conservative Protestants for their perceived traits.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it