MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140271623 · doi:10.1177/0022022107305238

Social Dominance Orientation and Ideological Asymmetry in Relation To Interracial Dating and Transracial Adoption in Canada

2007· article· en· W2140271623 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard N. Lalonde, Benjamin Giguère, Marsha Fontaine, Andrea Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial dominance orientationOpenness to experienceSocial psychologyPsychologyDominance (genetics)IdeologyHierarchyRace (biology)Social hierarchySociologyGender studiesDemocracyPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the relation between social dominance orientation (SDO) and three hierarchy-attenuating beliefs (attitude toward and openness to personally engaging in interracial dating and attitude toward transracial adoption) and two hierarchy-enhancing beliefs (stereotyping of interracial relationships and racial identity concerns in transracial adoption). Participants were 77 Black and 142 White Canadians from the Toronto area. SDO was significantly negatively related to the three hierarchy-attenuating beliefs and positively to the two hierarchy-enhancing beliefs for Whites, whereas no significant relationships were found for Blacks. The relation between SDO and the outcome variables for Blacks and Whites differed significantly with the exception of openness to interracial dating. Interracial dating experience moderated the relation between race, SDO, and openness to become personally involved in interracial dating. Results support and extend previous research by Fang, Sidanius, and Pratto. Their social implications 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 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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.430 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations41
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cross-Cultural PsychologySame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207