MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514331936 · doi:10.1177/0022146516660344

Socioeconomic and Racial-ethnic Disparities in Prosocial Health Attitudes

2016· article· en· W2514331936 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea N. Polonijo, Richard M. Carpiano, Paul L. Reiter, Noel T. Brewer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health and Social Behavior · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVaccine Coverage and Hesitancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsProsocial behaviorSocioeconomic statusEthnic groupPsychologyPsychological interventionPublic healthHealth equityDemographyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicinePopulationSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on prosocial attitudes, social networks, social capital, and social stratification suggest that lower-socioeconomic status (SES), Hispanic, and nonwhite individuals will be more likely than their higher-SES and non-Hispanic white counterparts to engage in health behaviors that serve a social good. Analyzing data from the University of North Carolina Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Immunization in Sons Study, we test whether SES and race-ethnicity are associated with willingness to vaccinate via prosocial attitudes toward HPV vaccination among adolescent males (n = 401) and parents (n = 518). Analyses revealed that (a) parents with lower education and (b) black and Hispanic parents and adolescent males reported higher prosocial vaccination attitudes, but only some attitudes were associated with higher willingness to vaccinate. We discuss these findings in terms of how prosocial attitudes may motivate certain health behaviors and serve as countervailing mechanisms in the (re)production of health disparities and promising targets of future public health interventions.

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)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations28
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health and Social BehaviorSame topicVaccine Coverage and HesitancyFrench-language works237,207