The Role of Assimilation and Multiculturalism for the Relation Between Social Dominance Orientation and Prejudice: The Case of Anglophones and Francophones in Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on national diversity policies show that cultural norms promoted by the government such as multiculturalism and assimilation play an important role in predicting the majority group members’ prejudice toward immigrants. However, the extent to which minority groups can share these cultural norms with majority group members is largely unknown. The first goal of the current research is to determine if majority and minority groups perceive similar national diversity policies and have comparable support for these policies. The second goal is to contrast, between majority and minority groups, the relationship between social dominance orientation (SDO) and prejudice toward immigrants while considering the mediation effect of national diversity policies. To reach these goals, 225 Francophones (nonimmigrant majority) and 207 Anglophones (nonimmigrant minority) living in the province of Québec answered a questionnaire. Analyses performed to satisfy the first goal indicate that Francophones and Anglophones perceive Quebecers’ support toward national diversity policies in similar ways despite the fact that Francophones show more personal support for assimilation than Anglophones while the reverse is true for multiculturalism. Regarding the second goal, results reveal that, when norms are salient, personal support for assimilation is a stronger mediator of the link between SDO and prejudice especially for Anglophones whereas the mediating role of personal support for multiculturalism is significant among Francophones only. The importance of considering majority and minority groups when elaborating national diversity policies is discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".