Educational Preferences Among Conservatives and Liberals in the United States: A Quantitative Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this quantitative survey research study was to explore educational preferences among individuals of conservative and liberal political orientation and of both genders in the United States of America with a 13-questionnaire survey that includes questions relating to different educational preferences. The literature review has revealed previously conducted research study that suggest that individuals of conservative and liberal political orientation may have psychological differences in the domain of emotions, attention, self-control, and cognition. However, the literature review did not reveal research studies that explored educational preferences between individuals with conservative and liberal political orientation in the United States. The results suggest that statistically significant difference exists in the preference to study abroad (χ ² (1, N = 200) = 3.739, p = 0.05). Additional differences, but without a statistically significant differences, were found in the preferences to read fiction and non-fiction genre, perform physically and non-physically challenging activities, perform reading and written assignments, and study in instructional settings where ration between the teachers and technology is uneven.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".