MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402558231 · doi:10.1086/732993

The Nonconsequences of COVID-19 on Left–Right Ideological Beliefs

2024· article· en· W4402558231 on OpenAlex

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

VenueThe Journal of Politics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPopulism, Right-Wing Movements
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)IdeologyLeft and right2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Political scienceVirologyMedicineLawPoliticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scholarship on past major crises, such as wars and depressions, argues that these events transformed mass attitudes about the role of the state. Motivated by these claims, we theorize reasons why the COVID-19 pandemic might have shifted citizens’ ideological beliefs and investigate whether it has. Using original panel data from the United Kingdom, we find no evidence that the pandemic affected beliefs about the role of government, even for those directly experiencing economic losses or new forms of state relief. In a follow-up survey experiment, we also find that voters do not change their opinions on redistribution or the role of government even when exposed to elite cues that frame the crisis as revealing the need for state expansion. Our findings suggest that crises may more commonly exert their effects on mass beliefs via the long-term feedback effects of elite-driven policy changes than through direct exposure to crisis conditions.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.335 · 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