MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6906511317 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/s56tq

Social categorization and math stereotyping (replication using new images)

2020· other· en· W6906511317 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Science Framework · 2020
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCategorizationWhite (mutation)Race (biology)Social categoryTest (biology)Association (psychology)White Britishsort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first purpose of this study is to replicate our previous study investigating how people spontaneously categorize Asian women, versus White men, when completing a math/arts IAT that allows these targets to be categorized by race, gender, or both. The second goal is to examine whether categorization (by race, gender, or both) results in stereotype-consistent associations. Specifically, are people who appear to be categorizing these faces primarily by gender less likely to associate Asian women with math compared to those who appear to be categorizing primarily by race? An Implicit Association Test (IAT) will be used to examine these questions. In the IAT, participants will be presented with Asian female faces and White male faces and will be asked to categorize these faces using a header showing both race and gender (i.e., “Asian Woman” cartoon image “White Man” cartoon imaes). In order to determine how people are primarily categorizing these faces, we will add 3 additional categorization trials seamlessly to the end of the measure. These will be selected from four images that include Asian men (n=2) and White women (n=2) of comparable age and attractiveness. If participants are attending primarily to race, they should sort these with the Asian woman and White man header, respectively. By contrast, if participants are attending primarily to gender, we should see the reverse pattern – Asian men should be sorted with the White Man header, and White women should be sorted with the Asian Woman header. Based on our previous studies, we anticipate that the majority of participants will categorize by gender and that they will show a math-gender stereotype on this implicit measure, despite the female images being exclusively of East-Asian women. Unlike our previous study with a similar design, we are making use of a new set of images from " Beaupré, M.G., & Hess, U. (in press). Cross-cultural emotion recognition among Canadian ethnic groups." Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology. (with one Asian female face replaced due to make-up; and taken from Utrecht ECVP). All images were also cropped with an oval so that only the main parts of the face appear. We plan to collect 160 participants.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Science FrameworkFrench-language works237,207