MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128955980 · doi:10.1017/s0008423910000107

The Limits of Tolerance in Diverse Societies: Hate Speech and Political Tolerance Norms Among Youth

2010· article· en· W2128955980 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsCivil libertiesMulticulturalismFreedom of expressionSociologyPolitical scienceHumanitiesSocial psychologyHuman rightsPsychologyLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Conventional measures of political tolerance have tended to assume that people see all forms of speech as equally legitimate (or equally illegitimate). This article develops an alternative view, and measure, of political tolerance to account for individual distinctions across types of speech. Political tolerance is conceptualized using three individual-level dispositions. The intolerant reject speech rights for all objectionable groups; absolute tolerators endorse speech rights for all groups viewed as objectionable; and multicultural tolerators support free speech except when such freedoms are used to target racial and ethnic minorities. Survey data from close to 10,000 youth in Canada and Belgium show that multicultural tolerance reflects civil liberties attitudes among many young citizens. These youth do see exclusionary speech as a special category of “intolerable” speech, consistent with legal restrictions on hate speech in many industrialized democracies. Such target group distinctions are an under-studied and under-specified component of contemporary political tolerance judgments. Résumé. Les mesures conventionnelles de la tolérance politique tendent à présumer que les gens perçoivent tous les discours comme étant également légitimes (ou également illégitimes). Cet article développe une perspective différente et une mesure plus nuancée de la tolérance politique en relevant des distinctions entre les types de propos. On distingue trois dispositions individuelles en matière de tolérance politique. Les intolérants rejettent la liberté d'expression pour tous les groupes ou propos perçus comme importuns; les gens absolument tolérants appuient la liberté d'expression pour tous les groupes ou propos perçus comme importuns; et les adhérents de la tolérance multiculturelle appuient la libre expression publique des idées, sauf quand celle-ci sert à bafouer les minorités ethniques et raciales. Les résultats d'une enquête menée auprès d'environ 10 000 jeunes au Canada et en Belgique indiquent qu'un grand nombre de jeunes citoyens pratiquent la tolérance multiculturelle. Ces derniers considèrent les propos empreints d'exclusion comme une catégorie spéciale de propos «intolérables», conformément aux lois contre la propagande haineuse adoptées dans la plupart des pays développés. Les distinctions de ce genre sont des facteurs négligés dans notre compréhension des jugements contemporains sur la tolérance politique.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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 studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.222 · 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