MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984107143 · doi:10.1007/s13644-014-0184-z

My Friend is Gay, But… The Effects of Social Contact on Christian Evangelicals’ Beliefs about Gays and Lesbians

2014· article· en· W1984107143 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Religious Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesbianSocial contactContact hypothesisContact theoryHomosexualitySocial psychologyPsychologyGender studiesPopulationSociologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the relationship between social contact with gays and lesbians and beliefs about homosexuality, and explicitly investigates whether this relationship is different for Christian evangelicals than for others. We find that although social contact with gays and lesbians is related to beliefs about homosexuality in ways predicted by social contact theory, those with a gay or lesbian friend hold more positive attitudes, this is not the case for Christian evangelicals. In fact, analyses reveal that the effect of social contact for Christian evangelicals is significantly less than the effect for non-evangelicals. Results suggest that social contact alone is not enough to positively change Christian evangelicals’ beliefs about gay and lesbian individuals. This research adds to our knowledge about social contact by providing empirical evidence that all subgroups of the population are not affected equally by social contact with minority groups—an important piece of information for theoretical developments and policy makers.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.408 · 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