MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2806155481

Pro-Black, Pro-White, or Proactive: Examining Predictors of Implicit Racial Bias in Black Participants

2016· dissertation· en· W2806155481 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Allison N. Bair

Bibliographic record

VenueYorkSpace (York University) · 2016
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite (mutation)Implicit biasPsychologyRacial biasSocial psychologyRace (biology)SociologyGender studies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of research examining implicit racial bias has focused on the biases held by White participants (Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004). By contrast, the implicit racial bias of minority group members has been largely overlooked, despite the potential for these associations to provide new insight into the nature of implicit social cognition. In the current research, I extended previous findings by examining predictors of implicit racial bias for Black participants. Specifically, across three studies conducted in two cultural contexts, I examined whether implicit racial bias was related to Black participants racial ideologies, defined as an individuals philosophy about how racial group members should live and interact with other groups in the larger society (Sellers, et al., 1997, pp.806). Consistent with my expectations, implicit racial bias, as measured by the Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald et al., 1998; 2003; Studies 1 & 2) and the Affective Misattribution Procedure (AMP; Payne et al., 2005; Study 3) was significantly correlated with racial ideologies. However, the specific relationship depended on the cultural context as well as the implicit measure. In Study 1, within the predominantly White Canadian context, Nationalist ideology was negatively correlated with implicit pro-White bias. By contrast, in Study 2, within the predominantly Black Jamaican context, Humanist ideology positively predicted pro-White bias (Study 2). In Study 3, again conducted in the predominantly White Canadian context but with a different measure of implicit racial bias (AMP), Nationalist ideology negatively predicted implicit pro-White bias, while both Assimilation and Humanist ideologies were positive predictors of implicit pro-White bias. In Study 3, explicit racial attitudes, system justification and individual versus collective success orientation were also significantly correlated with implicit racial bias as measured by the Affective Misattribution Procedure (AMP; Payne et al., 2005). As expected, however, ideologies accounted for unique variance in implicit racial bias. The implications of these findings for understanding implicit racial bias in Blacks, in predominantly White and Black contexts, 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYorkSpace (York University)→Same topicSocial and Intergroup Psychology→French-language works237,207→