MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999615224 · doi:10.1177/0146167201276006

Is this about You or Me? Self-Versus Other-Directed Judgments and Feelings in Response to Intergroup Interaction

2001· article· en· W1999615224 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocial psychologyFeelingCasualPrejudice (legal term)White (mutation)Affect (linguistics)Stereotype (UML)Contact hypothesisDevelopmental psychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research demonstrated that both dominant and lower status group members’ responses to interacting with an out-group member can center largely on thoughts and feelings about themselves. Pairs of students (either two White Canadians or one White Canadian and one Aboriginal Canadian) had casual get-acquainted discussions. Consistent with our hypothesis that individuals would tend to frame the interaction in terms of the other person’s evaluation of them, high-prejudice White Canadians felt stereotyped by an Aboriginal partner even though they actually were not stereotyped and even though they themselves did not stereotype an Aboriginal partner. Moreover, Aboriginal Canadians appeared to personalize negative behaviors exhibited by their White partner. These individuals experienced discomfort and self-directed negative affect—but not other-directed negative affect—when their White partner was high in prejudice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.333 · 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