MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4290660669 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1862753/v1

 Priming genetic explanations for addiction weakens the relationship between biological essentialism and stigma

2022· preprint· en· W4290660669 on OpenAlexafffund
Hasan Siddiqui, M. D. Rutherford

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAddictionEssentialismStigma (botany)PsychologyContext (archaeology)Priming (agriculture)Social psychologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatrySociologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Drug addiction is stigmatized, and this stigma contributes to poor outcomes for individuals with addiction. Researchers have argued that providing genetic explanations of addiction will reduce stigma (Richter et al., 2019), but there has been limited research testing this. We presented participants with news articles that either provided genetic or anti-genetic explanations of addiction. Participants’ biological essentialism correlated with stigma in the context of both opioid and methamphetamine addiction. However, this relationship was attenuated when participants were presented with news articles that provided a genetic explanation for addiction. This suggests that the relationship between essentialism and stigma is malleable.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.267
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development→French-language works237,207→