MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4241271174 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14654868

Ideological and threat predictors of religious and diet-based prejudice in Canada

2021· preprint· en· W4241271174 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Vashisht Asrani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversitySystems, Applications & Products in Data Processing (Canada)Western University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPrejudice (legal term)IdeologySocial psychologyOutgroupPsychologyIdentity (music)PoliticsPerceptionReligious identityFeelingGender studiesSociologyPolitical scienceReligiosityAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an increasing prevalence of negative attitudes toward vegans and vegetarians in North America. Religious reasons for diet might provide a buffering effect on prejudice towards these groups (MacInnis & Hodson, 2017). In the present thesis (Study 1), the role of socio-political ideology, threat perceptions and religious identity in understanding negative attitudes towards vegans and vegetarians, was investigated. Further, as imagined contact has been found to predict tolerant outgroup attitudes (Miles & Crisp, 2014), the relationship between imagined contact and attitudes towards vegans was studied (Study 2). Study 1 (n=406) and Study 2 (n=137) were both administered to undergraduate samples. In Study 1, religious identity had no buffering effect on attitudes towards vegans/vegetarians. Participants higher on ideology and threat held less favourable attitudes towards vegans and Sikh vegans/vegetarians. In Study 2, participants who imagined interacting with vegans reported liking them more (vs. control). Implications for future research 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact→French-language works237,207→