Gendered Egos: Attitude Functions and Gender as Predictors of Homonegativity
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 study used a correlational design with a sample of university students to clarify the relationships between attitude functions and homonegativity with respect to gender. Classic work on attitude functions posits that attitudes serve psychological needs for the attitude holder. Herek (1986b) adapted this theory to explain attitudes toward homosexuality. Herek (1987) identified four functions: ego-defensive (defense of threats to the self), value-expressive (expression of key values), social-expressive (expression of important social norms), and experiential (based on past experiences). Results suggested that men were more likely to attribute their attitudes to the ego-defensive function. Men and women were equally likely to attribute their attitudes to the experiential function. The ego-defensive function was the best predictor of homonegativity for men and women, whether they held generally positive or generally negative attitudes toward homosexuality. The experiential function did not predict homonegativity. Participants tended to be neither very homonegative nor very ego-defensive.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it