MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412022947 · doi:10.1080/08865655.2025.2527130

Public Opinion Toward Migrant-Assistance NGOs in Texas: The Effects of Place, Race, and Religion

2025· article· en· W4412022947 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thomas Longoria

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Borderlands Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Society, and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)Public opinionPolitical scienceSociologyEconomic growthGender studiesPolitical economyEconomicsPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asylum-seeking migrants (ASMs) receive direct assistance from faith-based nonprofit Migrant Assistance Centers (MACs). MACs have been “criminalized” in the media by conservative political elites potentially leading to public hostility toward MACs. Criminalization of MACs is important because they collaborate with government and receive government funding to do their work and rely on public support. This study examines attitudes toward MACs in Texas. Latinos who live in the borderlands are more supportive of MACs suggesting interaction effects of race and place and the effects of a fronterizo identity. Respondents who agree that MACs are motivated by faith are more likely to support MACs. This finding suggests that supporters of MACs could defend attempts to criminalize their work by carefully emphasizing their faith-motivation.

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)0.002
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Borderlands StudiesSame topicReligion, Society, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207