MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2301573792 · doi:10.1177/1745691615621272

Social Identities in a Globalized World

2016· review· en· W2301573792 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Rosenmann, Gerhard Reese, James E. Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives on Psychological Science · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationSociologyCollective actionOpposition (politics)Social identity theoryHumanitySocial identity approachBinary oppositionEpistemologyIdentification (biology)Environmental ethicsPolitical economySocial sciencePolitical scienceSocial groupLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globalization-the increasing interconnectedness of societies, economies, and cultures-is a defining feature of contemporary social life. Paradoxically, it underlies both the dynamics of global crises (e.g., rising inequality, climate change) and the possibilities for ameliorating them. In this review, we introduce globalization as a multifaceted process and elaborate its psychological effects with respect to identity, culture, and collective action. Using a social identity approach, we discuss three foci of identification: local culture, globalized Western culture, and humanity in its entirety. Each source of identification is analyzed in terms of its psychological meaning and position vis-à-vis the global power structure. Globalized Western culture forms the basis for an exclusive globalized identity, which privileges only some cultures and ways of life. We conceptualize reactions to its core values in terms of cultural identification and rejection and acceptance of, or opposition to, its global social order. Opposition to this inequitable global order is central to inclusive globalized identities (e.g., identification with humanity). These identities may encourage globally minded collective action, even as more research is needed to address their potential caveats. We consider possibilities for social change and action and conclude that a focused application of psychological science to the study of these issues is overdue.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.260
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations132
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives on Psychological ScienceSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207