MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320057365 · doi:10.1037/h0099277

Reproductive strategy and ethnic conflict: Slow life history as a protective factor against negative ethnocentrism in two contemporary societies.

2011· article· en· W2320057365 on OpenAlexaff
Aurelio José Figueredo, Dok J. Andrzejczak, Daniel N. Jones, Vanessa Smith‐Castro, Eiliana Montero

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social Evolutionary and Cultural Psychology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnocentrismEthnic conflictEthnic groupSocial psychologySociologyPsychologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Much previous theory and evidence in both social and evolutionary psychology has been equivocal and inconsistent regarding whether in-group altruism should predict out-group hostility, and whether this effect should be positive or negative in direction. A “slow” Life History (LH) strategy emphasizes both kin-selected altruism and reciprocal altruism as means of investing heavily in offspring, blood relatives, and mutualistic social relationships with both kith and kin. We therefore investigated whether a slow LH strategy, as a measurable individual-difference variable favoring in-group altruism (positive ethnocentrism), should predict out-group hostility (negative ethnocentrism), and what the direction of the hypothesized effect would be. We found that a multivariate latent variable representing slow LH strategy served as a protective factor against a latent variable representing Negative Ethnocentrism. These results were replicated in the United States of America and in the Republic of Costa Rica using Multisample Structural Equation Model with cross-sample equality constraints.

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)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations48
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social Evolutionary and Cultural PsychologySame topicEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorFrench-language works237,207