Who Interracially Dates: An Examination of the Characteristics of those who have Interracially Dated
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
Interracial romantic relationships are a useful barometer of macrolevel race relations. Much of the research of who enters into interracial relationships concentrates upon marital relationships. While this research is useful, there is little research regarding who interracially dates. Logistical regression analysis was conducted on data from a telephone survey. European-Americans, African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans and Asian-Americans were analyzed separately. Similar demographic and social factors predicted outdating across racial groups. Within three of the four racial groups studied, younger men and those who attended interracial schools were significantly more likely to interracially date. Surprisingly, neither religious preference nor geographic region provided significant explanatory value in interpreting interracial dating. Furthermore, this data did not support notions that majority-group members use interracial dating relationships to “trade up” by dating racial minorities with higher economic and educational attainment.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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