How feeling connected to one’s own community can increase support for addressing injustice impacting outgroup communities
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
How can agents of social change increase public support for minority communities? In three studies, we demonstrate how heightened feelings of community connection can predict support for addressing injustice in minority communities. Community connection, when experimentally evoked (Study 1) or measured (Study 3), was associated with heightened support for the government addressing substandard conditions in an African American housing project (Studies 1 and 3) and Native American reservations (Study 1). Mediation analyses revealed that this effect emerges, at least in part, because of a heightened perceived value of all communities—not merely one’s own (Studies 1 and 3). One reason that stronger feelings of community connection lead to (Study 2) or are associated with (Study 3) greater valuing of communities is a strengthened superordinate community identity. We tested additional potential mediators of the community connection–support relationship; out-group identification mediated but outgroup attachment did not. Implications for social change are 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.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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