MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Navigating Intra-Racial Dynamics: Psychological Needs and Self-Group Distancing Among East Asians

2025· article· en· W4416001797 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jennifer Ho, Yanhong Li

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVignetteDistancingSocial distanceAffect (linguistics)AutonomyIdentity (music)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on biases and stereotypes against East Asian (EA) workers has typically focused on inter-racial encounters. Accordingly, we have a limited understanding of how these stereotypes affect intra-racial dynamics among EA professionals. Drawing from self-determination and social identity threat theories, this experimental vignette study examines how psychological needs shape how EAs manage their identities and navigate intra-racial encounters in the workplace. EA professionals in the U.S. and Canada will be randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions (relatedness, autonomy, competency) or a neutral task, followed by measures of self-group distancing and knowledge management behaviors. Activating relatedness is expected to reduce self-group distancing and in turn knowledge hiding compared to activating autonomy or competence. Data collection will begin February 2025. Our study contributes to a more inclusive research agenda by examining how biases and stereotypes against EAs affect intra-racial group dynamics, encouraging further exploration to an understudied group in organizational research.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207