Geographical Frame of Reference and Dangerous Intergroup Attitudes: A Double‐Minority Study in Sri Lanka
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An ethnic group can comprise a local majority, but be a minority within a broader geographic region or vice‐versa. This situation has interesting psychological implications that may contribute to intergroup conflict. To test some of these implications, an experiment was conducted in Sri Lanka, during a ceasefire in the conflict between the government and Tamil rebellion forces. Participants were 100 Sinhalese students. An experimental manipulation was introduced to make one of two geographical regions salient: either just Sri Lanka (within which Sinhalese outnumber Tamils) or a broader region of south Asia (within which Sinhalese are outnumbered by Tamils). Following the manipulation, stereotypes and conflict‐relevant attitudes were assessed. Results revealed that when Sinhalese participants were inclined to think of their group as the outnumbered minority, stereotypic perceptions of Tamils were more demonizing (i.e., depicting Tamils as more malevolent and also more competent), and their conflict‐relevant attitudes were less conciliatory. These results have conceptual implications as well as implications for understanding conflict and conflict resolution.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".