MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162286740 · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2140

Prejudice in person memory: Self‐threat biases memories of stigmatized group members

2015· article· en· W2162286740 on OpenAlexaff
Gennaro Pica, Jocelyn J. Bélanger, Giuseppe Pantaleo, Antonio Pierro, Arie W. Kruglanski

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Social Psychology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyForgettingSocial psychologyPrejudice (legal term)Retrieval-induced forgettingAffect (linguistics)Cognitive psychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The present research investigated whether self‐threat biases memory via retrieval‐induced forgetting. Results show that people under self‐threat whose goal is to restore their self‐worth by making prejudicial judgments that deprecate others are more likely to exhibit an enhanced RIF effect for positive items and a reduced RIF for negative items ascribed to a stereotyped target (i.e., homosexual). Overall, the present findings are consistent with the view that motivation can affect the magnitude of RIF effects in person memory and that, in turn, they can serve as mechanisms for justifying desired conclusions.

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)0.005
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations9
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Social PsychologySame topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207