MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062733666 · doi:10.1037/a0015508

Stereotypes of Latinos and Whites: Do they guide evaluations in diverse work groups?

2009· article· en· W2062733666 on OpenAlexaff
Diana Jimeno‐Ingrum, Jennifer L. Berdahl, Brennis Lucero-Wagoner

Bibliographic record

VenueCultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCalifornia State University
KeywordsPsychologyEthnic groupWhite (mutation)Competence (human resources)Social psychologyClinical psychologyGerontologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined whether stereotypes of Latinos as less warm and less competent than Whites guided perceptions of individuals in interacting work groups. Both Whites and Latinos rated Latino group members as lower in competence and warmth than White group members. This occurred in work groups with a majority of White members as well as in work groups with a majority of Latino members. The most favorable ratings were received by solo Whites in majority Latino groups, whereas the least favorable ratings were received by solo Latinos in majority White groups. Implications and future directions for research are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority PsychologySame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207