MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566280206

A Cross-Cultural Investigation of Minority and Non-White Majority Children's Implicit Attitudes Toward Racial Outgroups

2015· dissertation· en· W2566280206 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meghan George

Bibliographic record

VenueYorkSpace (York University) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyWhite (mutation)Implicit-association testImplicit attitudeMalayRacial biasDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyImplicit biasContext (archaeology)Association (psychology)Ingroups and outgroupsCross-culturalPrejudice (legal term)Ethnic groupSocial cognitionCognitionRacismGender studiesPolitical scienceSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this research I aimed to increase our understanding of the early emergence of racial biases by examining the implicit racial attitudes of minority and non-White majority children in two cultures. In Study 1, minority children in Canada completed an Implicit Association Test to measure implicit racial attitudes. Young non-Black minority children held a pro-White (versus Black) implicit bias. However, unlike previous findings, the magnitude of bias was lower for older children. In Study 2, I examined the implicit attitudes of Malay (majority) and Chinese (minority) children and adults in Brunei with limited contact with White or Black peers. Children showed implicit pro-White and pro-Chinese (versus Black) biases by early childhood, but showed no pro-White (versus Chinese) bias. Together, these findings support theorizing about the development of implicit intergroup cognition (Dunham et al., 2008), but suggest that context can shape these biases to a greater extent than was previously thought.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.300 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYorkSpace (York University)Same topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207