MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042424144 · doi:10.1177/0093650211430687

Strength of Social Cues in Online Impression Formation

2011· article· en· W2042424144 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

VenueCommunication Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIngroups and outgroupsOutgroupPsychologySocial psychologySocial identity theoryIn-group favoritismIdentity (music)PerceptionSocial groupValence (chemistry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The social identity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE) predicts individuals in depersonalized settings associate with those with whom they share a salient social identity and disassociate from others. We challenge the strict ingroup/outgroup bifurcation used in prior research and posit that ingroup perceptions differ across distinct (i.e., moderate and extreme) outgroups. A 2 (high cues vs. low cues) × 3 (ingroup, moderate outgroup, extreme outgroup affiliation) experiment utilized 128 subjects to examine how members of an ingroup view individuals belonging to various outgroups. Findings expand SIDE research by addressing the interaction between the valence of social cues to a social group and the strength of those cues. The interaction demonstrates that ingroup members with stronger social cues are more socially identifiable than ingroup members who provided few cues to their ingroup membership, while extreme outgroup members who minimize cues to their identity are more socially identifiable to ingroup members than outgroup members who provide numerous cues.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.391
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.152 · 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