The Prevalence of Stereotypes Against the LGBTQ Community and the Effect of Education on Those Stereotypes
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
Stereotyping against the LGBTQ community is a major problem in modern society. Previous research has shown that stereotyping can be reduced through targeted education about the stereotyped group. This study aims to further research the effect of education on stereotypes as well as the prevalence of stereotypes against the LGBTQ community in a public high school in North Carolina. Building on existing work from Canada, this study questions the use of education in changing stereotypes and what is the baseline prevalence of those stereotypes. Based on previous peer-reviewed, published literature, this study will survey both students and teachers to establish a baseline of stereotyping occurring at this location. The researcher will teach a class about stereotypes and the LGBTQ community and measure the level of stereotypes before and after the presentation. Analysis showed that this high school had low levels of discrimination, which is a major sign of low levels of stereotyping. It also showed that education had a low-grade negative impact against stereotyping, effectively increasing stereotyping.
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 | 0.009 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it