National identity, institutional trust, and beliefs in COVID-19 origin conspiracies: A cross-national comparative study
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
Conspiracy theories flourished during the COVID-19 outbreak. The present study takes a cross-national comparative perspective to understand the relationships among people's national identities, trust in institutions, and their beliefs in COVID-19 origin conspiracy theories blaming other nations. Four cross-national surveys were conducted in China, South Korea, Spain, and the United States with a total of 1642 respondents. The results revealed that two dimensions of national identities—national hubris and restrictive views of legitimate membership—are positively related to beliefs in conspiracy theories targeting other nations. This relationship was supported in three countries with different social, political, historical, and cultural contexts and diverse meanings attached to national identities. Also, people's trust in mainstream media, governments, and scientists was found to moderate the relationships between national identities and beliefs in conspiracy theories; yet, this moderating effect was not consistent across the selected nations.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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