MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093299728 · doi:10.1353/dem.2006.0020

Friends for better or for worse: Interracial friendship in the United States as seen through wedding party photos

2006· article· en· W2093299728 on OpenAlex
Brent Berry

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

VenueDemography · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFriendshipPolitical scienceGender studiesPsychologyGeographySociologyDemographySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Friendship patterns are instrumental for testing important hypotheses about assimilation processes and group boundaries. Wedding photos provide an opportunity to directly observe a realistic representation of close interracial friendships and race relations. An analysis of 1,135 wedding party photos and related information shows that whites are especially unlikely to have black friends who are close enough to be in their wedding party. Adjusting for group size, whites and East and Southeast Asians (hereafter E/SE Asians) are equally likely to be in each other's weddings, but whites invite blacks to be in their wedding parties only half as much as blacks invite whites, and E/SE Asians invite blacks only one-fifth as much as blacks invite E/SE Asians. In interracial marriages, both E/SE Asian and black spouses in marriages to whites are significantly less likely than their white spouses to have close friendships with members of their spouse's race.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.294 · 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