MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Personal Relative Deprivation: A Look at the Grievous Consequences of Grievance

2008· article· en· W2131054895 on OpenAlexaff
Françine Tougas, Ann M. Beaton

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial and Personality Psychology Compass · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MonctonUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelative deprivationPsychologyGrievanceFeelingCovertDisengagement theorySustenanceSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract have first coined the term ‘relative deprivation’ to account for unexpected grievance expressed by members of a fortunate group. Many researchers have built on this work and have concluded that a person's feeling of deprivation is relative rather than absolute. In other words, deprivation stems from a social comparison with better‐off persons. In this chapter, a brief summary of the ground‐breaking research on relative deprivation is presented followed by an overview of research on overt and covert responses to personal relative deprivation. In accounting for the silent reactions of the underprivileged, we mainly focus on recent research linking personal relative deprivation to psychological disengagement. Turning to the responses of members of privileged groups, we take into account personal relative deprivation and gratification. Our concluding remarks suggest that responses of both the underprivileged and the privileged concur to the maintenance of the status quo.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.279 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial and Personality Psychology CompassSame topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207