MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135418686 · doi:10.1177/0146167214549540

Purpose in Life as a Resource for Increasing Comfort With Ethnic Diversity

2014· article· en· W2135418686 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony L. Burrow, Maclen Stanley, Rachel Sumner, Patrick L. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality and Social Psychology Bulletin · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity (politics)Ethnic groupFeelingPsychologyEthnically diverseSocial psychologyCultural diversityAffect (linguistics)White (mutation)GerontologySociologyMedicineCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emerging demographic trends signal that White Americans will soon relinquish their majority status. As Whites' acclimation to an increasingly diverse society is poised to figure prominently in their adjustment, identifying sources of greater comfort with diversity is important. Three studies (N = 519) revealed evidence that purpose in life bolsters comfort with ethnic diversity among White adults. Specifically, dispositional purpose was positively related to diversity attitudes and attenuated feelings of threat resulting from viewing demographic projections of greater diversity. In addition, when primed experimentally, purpose attenuated participants' preferences for living in an ethnically homogeneous-White city, relative to a more diverse city when shown maps displaying ethno-demographic information. These effects persisted after controlling for positive affect and perceived connections to ethnic out-groups, suggesting the robust influence of purpose. Potential benefits of situating purpose as a unique resource for navigating an increasingly diverse society are discussed.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 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

Citations44
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality and Social Psychology BulletinSame topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207