MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407353213 · doi:10.1080/10357718.2025.2462105

Honour versus face: a psycho-cultural approach to US-China great power politics

2025· article· en· W4407353213 on OpenAlexaff
Ye Xue

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal Of International Affairs · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHonourFace (sociological concept)ChinaPoliticsPolitical scienceGreat powerPower (physics)Political economySociologyLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a psycho-cultural framework for analysing US-China relations in the context of the great power competition, explaining the escalation of their rivalry and the proliferation of conflict. It emphasises the critical role of self-esteem and culture in shaping domestic and international dynamics, focusing on the interplay between honour and face as distinct expressions of self-esteem in US and Chinese societies. The study illustrates how pursuing national self-esteem drives confrontational interactions between these two powers, with the 2018–2020 US-China trade war as a prime example. Here, nationalist narratives were crafted to evoke emotional resonance with domestic audiences, intensifying the conflict beyond mere economic competition into a struggle for national self-esteem. The rise of identity politics in both countries has further exacerbated tensions, as perceived disrespect has triggered coercive responses, worsening bilateral relations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.026
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal Of International AffairsSame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207