MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237698400 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-10529

The Role of Defendant Race and Racially Charged Media in the Canadian Courtroom

2014· dissertation· en· W4237698400 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura McManus

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJury Decision Making Processes
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)Salience (neuroscience)VerdictAttributionPsychologyWhite (mutation)SalientSocial psychologyCriminologyRacial biasPolitical scienceLawSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study sought to examine the influence of defendant race and racially charged media on Canadian mock jurors' trial decisions.Two-hundred and ten participants read a racially charged or racially neutral article followed by a trial transcript involving a White, Black, or Aboriginal-Canadian defendant.Diverging from previous findings, this study did not find an effect of defendant race or race salience on verdict judgements or causal attributions.Rather, it demonstrated that when race is not a central feature to the case, making race salient may actually increase levels of racial bias for some mock jurors.The implication of this research largely appears to be that race salience affects Canadian and American mock jurors differently.Potential explanations and further implications for these unexpected findings are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.662

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicJury Decision Making ProcessesFrench-language works237,207