MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392756176 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1282835

Attitudes towards women in the military and their relation to both quantity and quality contact with female leaders

2024· article· en· W4392756176 on OpenAlexafffund
Adelheid A. M. Nicol

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityRoyal Military College of Canada
FundersCanadian Defence Academy
KeywordsPsychologyEmpathyPerspective (graphical)AnxietyMilitary personnelSocial psychologyQuality (philosophy)Sample (material)Clinical psychologyPsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contact experiences with women in senior leadership roles are important for creating acceptance of women in organizations dominated by men, such as the military, as leadership roles are considered demanding, requiring numerous agentic qualities that are often ascribed to men. The military lacks women in leadership levels within its organization. We wished to determine whether quality and quantity contact with women in leadership positions reduces intergroup anxiety, increases empathy and perspective-taking, and subsequently creates more favorable attitudes toward women in the military. This was examined in three studies, one with a military sample consisting of men (n = 95), another with a civilian sample of men (n = 367), and a third study with a civilian sample of women (n = 374). Our findings revealed that quality contact was related to attitudes toward women in the military for all three samples. Results from the indirect effects tests conducted for the civilian male and female samples revealed that for civilian men, intergroup anxiety demonstrated a significant indirect effect between quantity contact and attitudes toward women in the military, while both intergroup anxiety and perspective-taking demonstrated significant indirect effects between quality contact and attitudes toward women in the military. Furthermore, both quantity and quality contact demonstrated significant direct effects. On the other hand, results revealed that for civilian women the only significant relation was the direct effect between quality contact and attitudes toward women in the military. Intergroup anxiety, perspective-taking, and empathy did not demonstrate any indirect effects for the civilian women sample. Thus, given that interactions with women in leadership positions are related to views of women in the military, research should further explore the role of contact for women in non-traditional work roles.

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)0.008
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207