MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111119440 · doi:10.1177/0956797613497021

Attitudes Toward Arab Ascendance

2013· article· en· W2111119440 on OpenAlexaff
Felicia Pratto, Tamar Saguy, Andrew L. Stewart, Davide Morselli, Rob Foels, Antonio Aiello, María Aranda, Atilla Çidam, Xénia Chryssochoou, Kevin Durrheim, Véronique Eicher, Laurent Licata, James H. Liu, Liu Li, Ines Meyer, Orla T. Muldoon, Στάμος Παπαστάμου, Nebojša Petrović, Francesca Prati, Gerasimos Prodomitis, Joseph Sweetman

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutocracyIdeologyAutonomyMiddle EastDominance (genetics)DemocracyPolitical scienceSocial dominance orientationGovernment (linguistics)Political economyState (computer science)Development economicsPoliticsSociologyAuthoritarianismLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arab nations are decades behind many other previously colonized nations in developing stronger economies, more democratic institutions, and more autonomy and self-government, in part as a result of external interference. The year 2011 brought the potential for greater Arab autonomy through popular uprisings against autocratic governments in Tunisia, Egypt, and Yemen, and through the Palestinian request for state recognition by the United Nations. We examined the psychology of support for Arab ascendancy among adults in 14 nations in the Balkans, the Middle East, Asia, Oceania, Europe, and North America. We predicted and found that people low on social dominance orientation endorsed forming an independent Palestinian state and desired that the Arab uprisings succeed. Rejection of ideologies that legitimize outside interference with Arabs mediated this support. Measures and model results were robust across world regions. We discuss theoretical implications regarding the advent of new ideologies and extending social dominance theory to address international relations.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.363 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ScienceSame topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207