Cross-situational consistency of trait expressions and injunctive norms among Asian Canadian and European Canadian undergraduates.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the current paper, we sought to clarify when and why Asian Americans/Canadians and European Americans/Canadians differ in self-consistency (the consistency of personality traits across situations). METHOD: European Canadian (n = 220) and second-generation Asian Canadian (n = 166) undergraduates (Mage = 19 years) described the traits they expressed and the traits others wanted them to express (i.e., injunctive norms, or injunctions) in four different social situations (i.e., with parents, with friends, with siblings, and with professors). RESULTS: Self-consistency was greater among European Canadians than Asian Canadians, but only when comparing behavior with parents versus with peers (i.e., friends and siblings). The same pattern was found for injunctive consistency (cross-situational consistency of trait injunctions). Injunctions strongly predicted the behavior of both Asian and European Canadians, but because the injunctions from parents versus peers diverged more for Asian Canadians, so did their behaviors. Controlling for the effect of inconsistent injunctions across situations eliminated the ethnic difference in self-consistency. Finally, Asian Canadians who perceived their immigrant parents as embracing a Canadian identity were as cross-situationally consistent as European Canadians because they tended to behave-and believe their parents approved of their behaving-with parents similarly to how they behaved with peers (e.g., more carefree and outspoken). CONCLUSION: Contrary to previous theorizing, cultural influences on broad cognitive or motivational dispositions (e.g., dialecticism, collectivism) alone cannot explain the observed pattern of ethnic differences in consistency. To understand when bicultural individuals are less consistent across situations also requires an understanding of the specific situations across which they tend to encounter divergent social norms. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".