MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600275373 · doi:10.1080/2153599x.2016.1267032

Religion and prosocial behavior among the Indo-Fijians

2017· article· en· W2600275373 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueReligion Brain & Behavior · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCulture, Economy, and Development Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaDepartment of Electronics and Information Technology, Ministry of Communications and Information TechnologyJohn Templeton Foundation
KeywordsEthnic groupProsocial behaviorIndigenousSocial psychologyHinduismPsychologyPriming (agriculture)Ingroups and outgroupsSociologyReligious studiesAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research has claimed that world religions can extend the in-group beyond local and ethnic boundaries to form larger multi-ethnic groups, expanding human societies. Two experiments were run in Fiji to test religion’s ability to expand group boundaries. Experiment 1 employed a religious prime to increase prosocial behavior towards co-religionists among Hindu Indo-Fijians in an economic game. There were no overall effects of priming, but gender-specific effects were found. Priming reduced the amount women biased coin allocations to favor their preferred group. Men showed no bias in either condition. Experiment 2 employed the same economic game, without a prime, in a sample of indigenous Fijian and Indo-Fijian Christians. In this game, the monetary allocations were made between different religious and ethnic groups to test if preferences for religious in-groups were stronger than preferences for ethnic in-groups. Indo-Fijian Christians showed bias against their own ethnic group if they were from a different religion (Hindus or Muslims), but allocated fairly towards Christians from a different ethnic group (indigenous Fijians). Indigenous Fijians allocated less money to Muslims, but not Hindus. This evidence suggests that religious bonds can overcome the preference for one’s own ethnic group and expand in-groups to multi-ethnic religious groups.

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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.294 · 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