MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410260712 · doi:10.1111/pops.70032

Bridging the divide: Understanding the psychological factors influencing feminist women's support to transgender related policies

2025· article· en· W4410260712 on OpenAlexaff
Danna Galván‐Hernández, Lucía Estevan‐Reina, Ángel del Fresno‐Díaz, Finn Frohn, Stephen C. Wright, Soledad de Lemus

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónEuropean Regional Development FundUniversidad de Granada
KeywordsTransgenderBridging (networking)Transgender womenPsychologyGender studiesTransgender PersonTransgender peopleSocial psychologySociologyComputer scienceMedicineComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The demand for trans people's institutional rights and the approval of the Trans Law (Law 04/3023) has polarized the feminist movement in Spain. In this contentious context, our studies examined the relationship between feminist identity and support for, or opposition to, trans rights among the University community. Two correlational studies (Study 1a = 317; Study 1b = 323) conducted before the law's passage provided opposing results regarding the association between feminist identity and support for trans rights. Building upon these findings, two experimental studies (Study 2 N = 415; Study 3 N = 405) exposed ciswomen to cooperation or conflict narratives and examined their impact on reactive threat, zero‐sum beliefs, and support for pro‐trans or anti‐trans collective actions. Conflict narratives increased reactive threat and zero‐sum beliefs, leading to more anti‐trans and fewer pro‐trans actions. Additionally, a direct positive link was observed between feminist identification and support for pro‐trans actions, while a negative association was found with anti‐trans actions (opposite for ideological threat). Based on these findings, we propose a series of win‐win strategies to support trans rights and promote peacebuilding and inclusivity in Spanish universities without triggering threat or zero‐sum beliefs in ciswomen.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical PsychologySame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207