Capturing Changes in Social Identities over Time and How They Become Part of the Self‐concept
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract How people come to develop a feeling of belongingness to a new social group and orchestrate this new group membership with pre‐existing identities within the self‐concept is a theoretically and socially relevant phenomenon that has received increased scientific attention in recent years. Models from different fields of psychology – including social, cultural, and organizational psychology – have proposed factors involved in this change and integration process along with consequences of this phenomenon. We present overview of this literature, including a recent model on the process of identity integration: the cognitive‐developmental model of social identity integration. Specifically, this model highlights the fundamental cognitive and developmental processes involved as people develop new social identifications and integrate their different identities into their overall self‐concept. We then present recent empirical evidence testing the model. Finally, we propose conceptual, methodological, and statistical avenues for future research on identity change and integration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it