MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097012850 · doi:10.1080/00223980903356065

Authoritarianism, Conservatism, Racial Diversity Threat, and the State Distribution of Hate Groups

2009· article· en· W2097012850 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

VenueThe Journal of Psychology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAuthoritarianismWrightConservatismIdeologyDiversity (politics)LiberalismErikson's stages of psychosocial developmentPsychologyDemocracyState (computer science)Public opinionSocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceLawPoliticsPsychoanalysisHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the basis of K. Stenner's (2005) authoritarian dynamic theory, the author hypothesized that there is an interaction between U.S. state conservatism-liberalism and state racial heterogeneity threat, such that greater diversity threat tends to be associated with more hate groups in more conservative states and fewer hate groups in more liberal states. State aggregates of the conservative-liberal ideological preferences of 141,798 participants from 122 CBS News/New York Times national telephone polls conducted between 1976 and 1988 (R. S. Erikson, G. C. Wright, & J. P. McIver, 1993) served as proxies for authoritarian-nonauthoritarian dispositions. For the 47 states with complete data, the hypothesized interaction was tested for 2000, 2005, and 2006 with hierarchical multiple regression strategies and supported. The author's hypothesis was also affirmed with SES and the interaction of SES and diversity threat controlled for. In contrast, SES entirely accounted for simple relationships between threat and hate group frequency.

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.541
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.315 · 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