What Do You Think About Change? The Influence of RMC Students’ Conformity to Masculine Norms and Social Dominance Orientation on Embracing Culture Change in the Canadian Armed Forces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) has recently committed to improving its organizational culture after several sexual misconduct allegations were made against its senior leaders (Government of Canada, 2021). Currently, the general goal of cultural reform has been frequently mentioned and used as a notion to inspire CAF members to look forward to the prospective transformations that will come about (Eyre, 2021). On the contrary, research in this area suggests that the military’s institutionalization of uncompromising masculine standards may be an obstacle in the way of true ‘culture change’ (Pendlebury, 2020; Richard & Molloy, 2020). This study evaluated whether service members’ openness to the culture change in the CAF is hindered by their personal endorsement of masculine norms and a dominant social worldview. Military students (n = 145) at the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC) took part in this research by completing measures of Social Dominance Orientation, Masculinity, and Attitudes towards the CAF culture change. The results of an indirect effects analysis indicated that higher conformity to masculine norms was associated with less acceptance toward the CAF’s movement towards culture reform, which was explained by one’s preference for out-group superiority and inequality. These findings suggest that achieving culture change is not only a matter of ending sexual misconduct, but perhaps more importantly, involves challenging the implicit attitudes of hyper-masculinity and social dominance in the Canadian military.
 Keywords: masculine conformity, hegemonic masculinity, masculine norms, social dominance orientation, culture change, military, Canadian Armed Forces
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".