Right‐wing adherence and objective numeracy as predictors of minority group size perceptions and size threat reactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual minority populations are growing rapidly in the West. We investigate predictors and consequences of threat responses to perceived minority group size, and perceptions of minority group size itself. Study 1 ( N = 274) finds that right‐wing adherence predicts greater size threat , whereas lower numerical ability predicts larger perceived group size (confirmed in Studies 2–3). Study 2 (Sample 1, N = 124; Sample 2, N = 263) finds that the relation between right‐wing adherence and prejudice toward minorities exhibits an indirect effect via group size threat (but not perceived size), explaining 35–66% of this relation. Study 3 ( N = 310) finds a comparable indirect effect explaining 27–40% of this relation, even after statistically controlling for indirect effects of realistic, symbolic, and terroristic threat. These findings provide novel insights into psychological processes surrounding perceived minority group size, identifying size threat as especially crucial in understanding intergroup relations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".