Ethno-Racial Origins of Candidates and Electoral Performance
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 article uses the Canadian case to assess whether voter bias plays a role in accounting for the underrepresentation of ethnic minorities, especially racial minorities, in the national legislatures of diverse societies. Two sets of empirical analyses are performed, drawing on the results of the 1993 Canadian general election: survey information on candidates who ran for the major parties and census data on constituency characteristics. The first set tests for overt voter bias against minority candidates by employing several categories of minority origins, party and constituency variables to control for contextual effects, and candidate vote-share as the dependent variable. The second set tests for a more subtle form of bias that is sometimes associated with the need for minority candidates to be exceptionally qualified (‘compensation hypothesis’). The evidence indicates that minorities do not lose votes in elections because of their background and do not need to have more personal credentials in order to gain votes. The results suggest that any misgivings party officials may have about the electoral performance of minority candidates are misplaced.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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