When the “We” Impacts How “I” Feel About Myself
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
Dramatic social change leads to profound societal transformations in many countries around the world. The two recent revolutions in March 2005 and April 2010, and the ethnic conflict in June 2010 in Kyrgyzstan are vivid examples. The present research aims to understand people’s reactions to dramatic social change in terms of personal well-being. To further understand how people react psychologically to dramatic social change, the theoretical framework of our research is based on a dominant theory in social psychology: Collective relative deprivation theory. In the past, researchers have argued that collective relative deprivation is logically associated with collective outcomes, and thus is not likely to impact personal well-being (e.g., Walker & Mann, 1987 ). Others, however, have argued that feelings of collective relative deprivation do impact personal well-being (e.g., Zagefka & Brown, 2005 ). We postulate that these inconsistent results arise because past research has failed to consider multiple points of comparison over time to assess collective relative deprivation. Specifically, we theorize that multiple points of collective relative deprivation need to be taken into account, and in so doing, collective relative deprivation will, indeed, be related to personal well-being. We also explore the entire trajectory of collective relative deprivation (which represents how an individual perceives the evolution of his/her group’s history across time) to predict personal well-being. In the present study, we tested these theoretical propositions in the context of dramatic social change in Kyrgyzstan. Regressions, group-based trajectory modeling, and MANOVA confirm our hypotheses.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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