The Indirect Effects of Right Wing Authoritarianism and Ambivalent Sexism in Cadets' Opinions on the Fairness of RMC's Physical Performance Test
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an effort to create an inclusive culture, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) has been attempting to eradicate sexism within its ranks (Scoppio, 2019). Despite these efforts, female soldiers continue to face discrimination in the CAF. At the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC), cadets must complete a physical performance test (PPT), in which male and female cadets are scored differently according to sex due to biological differences. Evidence shows that the separate marking scheme creates a divide between the sexes, as female cadets feel that their PPT scores are taken less seriously than male cadets and male cadets denigrate the PPT scores obtained by female cadets (Scoppio, 2019). Right wing authoritarianism (RWA), ambivalent sexism (AS), and its two subscales, benevolent sexism (BS) and hostile sexism (HS) may help explain attitudes regarding gender fairness of PPT scores. Results from a sample of 169 cadets' revealed that the relationship between RWA and BS and RWA and AS do not significantly predict opinions on the PPT and the indirect effects were not significant. However, the indirect effects between RWA, HS, and attitudes regarding the PPT were significant.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".