Taking a look in the virtual mirror: Implications of self-observation by White individuals during online intergroup exchanges for their own and their racialized partners’ experience
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concerns about being viewed negatively by outgroup members can have harmful implications for intergroup interaction. In line with the information search model, research suggests that trying to empathize with outgroup partners—by virtue of still involving taking outgroup members’ perspective—can lead right back to evaluative concerns. The present experiment (276 dyads) tested the model’s further prediction that—by virtue of still involving a focus on the self—stimuli that typically instantiate private self-awareness and prompt enhanced self-regulation also lead right back to evaluative concerns and their disruptive effects in interaction settings. Higher and lower prejudice White individuals (HPs and LPs) turned their self-view on or off during an online exchange with a partner with a marginalized racial background. Although there were some exceptions, results were generally consistent with predictions: Racialized individuals benefitted when HPs engaged in self-observation, but everyone was better off if LPs could not watch themselves.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it