MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024775104 · doi:10.1002/ejsp.2681

Concealability beliefs facilitate navigating intergroup contexts

2020· article· en· W3024775104 on OpenAlexafffund
Joel M. Le Forestier, Elizabeth Page‐Gould, Calvin K. Lai, Alison L. Chasteen

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Social Psychology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPsychologyOutgroupSocial psychologyAnxietyPropositionIdentity (music)Social identity theoryQuality (philosophy)Social group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Living in a diverse world requires the ability to navigate intergroup contexts. However, interacting with outgroup members can cause anxiety that leads to lower‐quality interactions and avoidance of future contact. One reason people experience this anxiety is the concern that others will judge them on the basis of an identity. These concerns may be reduced among people who believe the identity is unperceivable by others. The belief that one's identity is concealable may therefore reduce intergroup anxiety and ease people's experiences in intergroup contexts. The present work tests this proposition in two studies and finds that individual differences in concealability beliefs are negatively associated with intergroup anxiety and positively associated with the propensity to initiate intergroup contact and with the quantity and quality of people's cross‐group friendships. Materials, data, and code for both studies and a pre‐registration for Study 2 are available online ( https://osf.io/4cjhg/ ).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Social PsychologySame topicSocial and Intergroup PsychologyFrench-language works237,207