The Role of Emotions in Determining Willingness to Engage in Intergroup Contact
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
This research explored the role of affect (i.e., emotions) and cognitions (i.e., stereotypes and symbolic beliefs) in Whites’ willingness to engage in contact with Blacks and, in a comparison behavior, endorsement of social policies for Blacks. Specifically, participants were instructed to focus on their feelings or on their thoughts while watching a video portraying discrimination toward Blacks or a comparison video. As predicted, participants who watched the discrimination video while focusing on their emotions showed greater willingness to engage in contact with Blacks than did participants in the other three conditions. Mediational analysis suggested that this effect was mediated by changes in emotions toward Blacks. In contrast, social policy endorsement and cognitions about Blacks were not affected by the focus manipulation. Results are discussed in terms of the importance of moving beyond assessing and attempting to change intergroup attitudes at a global level to examining the affective and cognitive bases of these attitudes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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