MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896372182 · doi:10.1177/0020715218806037

The three facets of national identity: Identity dynamics and attitudes toward immigrants in Russia

2018· article· en· W2896372182 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lusine Grigoryan, Vladimir Ponizovskiy

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatriotismNational identityNationalismPoliticsImmigrationIdentity (music)SociologyContext (archaeology)Political scienceSocial psychologyGender studiesPsychologyGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study contributes to the discussion on individual-level determinants of anti-immigrant prejudice by applying a multi-dimensional model of manifestations of national identity in Russia. This context is particularly interesting as anti-immigrant sentiments are widespread across all social strata and thus, socioeconomic indicators and political views are weak predictors of such sentiments. We use cross-sectional data from 1995, 2003, and 2013 ISSP National Identity module to assess the dynamics of three facets of national identity in Russia, namely nationalism, political patriotism, and cultural patriotism, and their relations with attitudes toward immigrants. We find nationalism, political patriotism, and anti-immigrant attitudes to increase over time. More importantly, our findings support the theoretical distinction between the facets of national identity: nationalism is linked to anti-immigrant attitudes, political patriotism is linked to more positive attitudes, and cultural patriotism is largely unrelated to attitudes toward immigrants. We show that these facets of national identity have much higher predictive power than sociodemographic indicators or political views. Our findings underscore the utility of a nuanced assessment of national identity in explaining attitudes toward immigrants in non-Western contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations39
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207