MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309901754 · doi:10.1111/soc4.13051

Predicting group consciousness among Asian Americans: Considering commonalities, shared interests, panethnic group identification, and linked fate

2022· article· en· W4309901754 on OpenAlex
Harvey L. Nicholson, Di Mei

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociology Compass · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroup identificationEthnic groupConsciousnessPoliticsInterpersonal communicationSocial psychologyImmigrationFeelingGender studiesIdentification (biology)Group conflictPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceAnthropologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Identifying factors linked to the development of group consciousness is important toward bettering our understanding of group formation processes among marginalized ethnoracial groups. This study examines predictors of group consciousness among Asians and Asian Americans in the United States, focusing on numerous dimensions of this concept, including linked fate, panethnic group identification, and four specific sources of perceived group commonality and interests: (1) cultural, (2) economic, (3) political, and (4) racial. We use data from a national survey to examine socio‐structural, political, discrimination, and immigration correlates associated with separate dimensions of Asian group consciousness. We found that perceiving interpersonal discrimination increased the importance of being Asian; heightened the odds of feeling linked fate with other Asian people; and enhanced the odds of identification as “Asian American.” Republicans and Independents were less likely to perceive different elements of Asian group consciousness compared to Democrats. Educational attainment, income, gender, employment status, ethnicity, and English‐speaking comfortability had varying effects across certain measures of Asian group consciousness. For Asians and Asian Americans, interpersonal discrimination and certain socio‐structural, political, and immigration factors may be especially meaningful toward the development of linked fate, shared group interests and commonalities, and panethnic identification, all of which are key toward activating group consciousness.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.279 · 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