Malleability of implicit associations across development
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevalence of implicit intergroup bias in adults underscores the importance of knowing when during development such biases are most amenable to change. Although research suggests that implicit intergroup bias undergoes little change across development, no studies have directly examined whether developmental differences exist in the capacity for novel implicit associations to form or change. The present study examined this issue among children ages 5-12. Results from over 800 children provided evidence that novel implicit associations formed quickly, regardless of child age, association type (evaluative or non-evaluative) or the target of the association (social or non-social). Moreover, the magnitude of these changes was comparable across conditions. Coupled with similar findings among adults, these data underscore the importance of first impressions in shaping implicit intergroup bias and provide further evidence that the acquisition of implicit associations is governed by a domain-general mechanism that may be fully in place by age 5.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it