MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2460233195 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01001

The More (Social Group Memberships), the Merrier: Is This the Case for Asians?

2016· article· en· W2460233195 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Melissa Xue‐Ling Chang, Jolanda Jetten, Tegan Cruwys, Catherine Haslam, Nurul F. Praharso

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsPsychologySocial supportSocial psychologyAsian americansDevelopmental psychologyEthnic groupSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While previous studies have consistently shown that belonging to multiple groups enhances well-being, the current research proposes that for Asians, multiple group memberships (MGM) may confer fewer well-being benefits. We suggest that this is due, in part, to Asian norms about relationships and support seeking, making Asians more reluctant to enlist social support due to concerns about burdening others. Overall, MGM was associated with enhanced well-being in Westerners (Study 2), but not Asians (Studies 1-3). Study 2 showed that social support mediated the relationship between MGM and well-being for Westerners only. In Study 3, among Asians, MGM benefited the well-being of those who were least reluctant to enlist support. Finally, reviewing the MGM evidence-base to date, relative to Westerners, MGM was less beneficial for the well-being of Asians. The evidence underscores the importance of culture in influencing how likely individuals utilize their group memberships as psychological resources.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.727
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations36
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207