Support for Repatriation Policies of Migrants
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
In this article we focus on the acceptance of migrants among the general public in the receiving societies. We analyze the most radical of such anti-immigrant sentiments, that is, the support for repatriation policies for legally established immigrants. We analyze intra- and international differences among Western and Eastern European societies, taking advantage of recently collected cross-national high quality data providing means to rigorously test hypotheses on individual and contextual level determinants. Although there are large differences between countries within European regions, we found that support for repatriation policies is overall somewhat higher in Western European societies. In line with Ethnic Group Conflict Theory, support for repatriation policies is stronger in countries with higher proportions of resident migrants and higher levels of immigration. Regarding individual level determinants, we found that particularly lower educated individuals are more in favor of repatriation of migrants. The effect of education differs however across countries and is — in line with socialization theories — less strong in Eastern European countries.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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