MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982103469

Grumbling, voting, demonstrating, and rioting : a model of social identity and decision-making in intergroup contexts

2001· dissertation· en· W6982103469 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2001
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSolar Energy Systems and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIngroups and outgroupsOutgroupSocial identity theoryGroup conflictReferentCollective actionContext (archaeology)In-group favoritismSocial identity approach
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An individual faced with intergroup conflict must choose from a vast array of possible actions, ranging from grumbling among ingroup friends to voting and demonstrating to rioting and revolution. The present thesis proposes a model of decision-making in intergroup contexts oriented towards understanding how group members choose among these behavioural alternatives. Intergroup decisions are conceptualized as rationally shaped by perceptions of the benefits and costs associated with the action (expectancy-value processes). In intergroup contexts, group-level costs and benefits may play a critical role in individuals' decision-making. Perception of the dynamic between ingroup and outgroup norms is thought to be a key determinant of the group-level benefits and costs associated with individualistic or collective actions. Four studies explore the predictive value of this model for understanding decision-making in the context of English-French conflict in Quebec. Studies 1 and 2 provide evidence that group-level costs and benefits influence individuals' decision-making, in intergroup contexts. Contrary to the predictions of individualistic models of decision-making such as the theory of planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1985), the individual level of analysis was not observed to mediate the group level of analysis. Moreover, contrary to recent social identity theorizing (Kelly, 1993; Simon et al., 1998), perceived group-level costs and benefits were implicated in the relationship between social identity and intentions to engage in collective action. Studies 3 and 4 provide evidence that outgroup and ingroup norms may interact to influence decision-making. Thus, contrary to the referent informational influence model (Terry & Hogg, 1996; Turner, 1991), ingroup norms alone did not determine group members' actions. Moreover, Study 4 provides evidence that the dynamic between ingroup and outgroup norms influences evaluations of the costs and benefits of intergroup behaviours, both

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.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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