A Legacy of Derogation: Prejudice toward Aboriginal Persons in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interpersonal prejudice toward Aboriginal men and women has, to date, received little attention from Canadian social psychologists. The present study sought to address this omission by examining the correlates of Old-Fashioned Prejudice (O-PATAS) and Modern Prejudice (M-PATAS) toward Aboriginal persons. Data from two samples (Sample 1: n = 280, 71.6% females; Sample 2: n = 163, 70.9% females) were used. As predicted, in Sample 1, respondents evidenced greater levels of modern prejudice than old-fashioned prejudice, and both forms correlated positively with social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism and negativity toward other stigmatized groups (specifically, gay men and overweight persons). For Sample 2, modern prejudice toward Aboriginal people correlated negatively with empathy as well as self-reported contact with Aboriginal people. However, no association was observed between scores on the M-PATAS and a multifaceted measure of religiosity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".