MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381615051 · doi:10.1037/cdp0000605

Ethnic-racial identity and ethnic-racial socialization competency: How minoritized parents “walk the talk”.

2023· article· en· W4381615051 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa Kiang, N. Keita Christophe, Gabriela L. Stein, Howard C. Stevenson, Shawn C. T. Jones, Michele Chan, Riana Elyse Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueCultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority Psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocializationPsychologyEthnic groupCompetence (human resources)PsychosocialSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPerceptionSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Ethnic-racial identity (ERI) has important implications for individual psychosocial functioning as well as familial processes. For example, parents' ERI can shape children's developmental contexts through ethnic-racial socialization (ERS). Yet, existing research has tended to focus on the content or frequency of socialization messages themselves rather than on internal factors like socialization competence. Such competence, as reflected through confidence, skills, and stress, represents critical dimensions that permeate the socialization process and can impact the delivery of messages. The present study examines whether parents' ERI (i.e., private regard, centrality, exploration) is related to perceptions of their socialization competence. METHOD: = 9.14, 59.70% mothers) of adolescents between the ages of 10-18 were collected via Qualtrics panels. RESULTS: Across all parents, private regard, centrality, and ethnic-racial exploration were positively associated with perceived confidence and skills in engaging in ERS. Regard was additionally associated with lower socialization stress. CONCLUSIONS: The results point to consistent benefits of ERI in helping parents navigate ERS, furthering the understanding of ERI's developmental implications through parents' comfort with and ability to "walk the talk" with their children. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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)0.005
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.231
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCultural Diversity & Ethnic Minority PsychologySame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207