Intergroup contact research in the 21st century: Lessons learned and forward progress if we remain open
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: QualitativeConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: none
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.693
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.612
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
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
Abstract
Abstract This article presents the 2021 JSI special issue on intergroup contact, which we designed to offer a fresh outlook on a rapidly expanding literature on the antecedents, dynamics, and consequences of interactions between members of opposing groups in society—or intergroup contact. We start by discussing the results of a bibliographic search of intergroup contact research between 1937 and 2021 and organizing our analysis around two distinct phases of this research, as they are demarcated in volume and quality by Pettigrew and Tropp's landmark meta‐analysis in 2006. We then turn our attention to an overview of the 12 review and commentary articles contributing to the special issue, which reflect advancements in themes, methodologies, and analytics of the last 15 years of research. We argue that this second generation of research has effectively addressed influential and legitimate critiques of the literature and, as a result, led to a more complex and nuanced understanding of intergroup contact that can now be readily harnessed by social cohesion practitioners and policy makers to increase the efficacy of contact‐based interventions in society. We conclude by calling on a third generation of research on intergroup contact that fully harnesses diversity of ideas, peoples, and minds and keeps in close check unproductive dynamics that stifle scientific progress, and pose a threat to healthy and safe research communities. Together with the 50 diverse contributors of this special issue, we commit to making the intergroup contact research community, like the topic of intergroup contact itself, diverse and inclusive.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Journal of Social Issues
- Topic
- Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Field
- Social Sciences
- Canadian institutions
- University of Toronto
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- CommitPublic relationsPsychological interventionCohesion (chemistry)Community cohesionDiversity (politics)Social contactPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsSocial psychologyComputer scienceEngineeringLaw
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes