Intersectionality, Linked Fate, and LGBTQ Latinx Political Participation
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
This article uses the concepts of intersectionality and linked fate to understand the relationship between group identification and political behavior among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) and non-LGBTQ Latinx individuals. Drawing on the 2016 Collaborative Multiracial Post-Election Survey (CMPS), we find that LGBTQ Latinx respondents report feelings of linked fate to both the Latinx and LGBTQ community, and that LGBTQ Latinx respondents exhibit more political participation than their non-LGBTQ Latinx counterparts. We then find that Latinx and LGBTQ linked fate are significant predictors of participation for non-LGBTQ respondents, and LGBTQ linked fate to predict LGBTQ Latinx participation. Finally, we provide evidence that suggests that feeling linked fate toward more than one marginalized group does not necessarily translate into participation in a greater number of political activities, demonstrating the complexity of group identification for predicting political participation. This study contributes to the theorizing of linked fate and political participation by deploying an intersectional lens that challenges assumptions of Latinx and LGBTQ intragroup political coherence and illuminates the complex effects that different kinds of linked fate have on political participation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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