Love thine enemy? Evidence that (ir)religious identification can promote outgroup tolerance under threat
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
The divide between religious traditionalists and secular humanists has been widening for decades; yet, little is known about factors that attenuate hostility between these groups. Two studies examined whether (ir)religious identification could mitigate negative feelings toward (ir)religious outgroups. Following priming to make salient religious groups in daily life or group-based threat, Atheists and Christians in Britain (Study 1, n = 113), and Atheists, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and Protestants in Canada (Study 2, n = 181) reported intergroup feelings, ingroup evaluations, and perceptions of their group as viewed by others. Atheists reported the lowest ingroup identification and felt equally negative toward all religious groups. Likewise, religious group members generally felt most negative toward Atheists. However, identification with the (ir)religious ingroup was associated with less hostility toward the outgroup(s). This was particularly marked for Atheists who perceived that religious followers felt positively toward them. These results challenge suggestions that (ir)religious identification and threat necessarily promote intergroup hostility.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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