standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| concept | concepts | an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| control | controls | an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 4 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| claim_type | mechanism Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | priming of cultural diversity models Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | behavioural-experiment Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: behavioural-experiment | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. status: the paper's own words: we propose that | mechanisms[0] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[1] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Both studies were underpowered for the effect sizes assumed. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Convenience sample of Hong Kong university students limits generalisation. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Identity measures were placed after the manipulation, so they could not be used as moderators. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Because the two identity styles were outcomes rather than predictors, their distinct functions could not be separated. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[3] | the tagger's words | |
| controls | a CULTURAL control condition against the multicultural priming condition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: that any culture-related prime reduces social distancing - the control is cultural in content and differs only in being multicultural · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| controls | participants randomly assigned to the priming or the no-prime condition on beginning the questionnaire Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: that a difference between conditions is a difference between the people in them · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concepts | multiculturalism Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: multiculturalism | concepts[0] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | assimilation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: assimilation | concepts[1] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | colorblindness Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: colorblindness | concepts[2] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | social distance Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: social distance | concepts[3] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | culture mixing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: culture mixing | concepts[4] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | social distancing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: social distancing | concepts[5] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| senses | multiculturalism against assimilation and colorblindness - THREE DIVERSITY MODELS ON ONE AXIS, and the axis is stated: whether cultural difference is APPRECIATED or IGNORED. Colorblindness and assimilation are put on the same side, which is a grouping this literature does not always make Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | social distance, as measured here - a construct defined by the EXTENT of contact refused, from marriage down to co-residence in a city. The scale is the definition, which is what makes `prejudice` operational in this design Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | the prime, in this study - not a word list or a photograph but A DESCRIPTION OF THE READER'S OWN COUNTRY: a passage about how China handles diversity, read by Hong Kong students who are both minority and majority culture members. The manipulation is a national self-description Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | contradicts → Verkuyten (2005), on multiculturalism priming among Turkish minorities in the Netherlands Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Todd and Galinsky (2012) multiculturalism priming materials Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Stone and Crisp (2007) superordinate-identity assimilation priming material Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | extends → Morrison et al. (2010), on symbolic threat as mediator of reactions to multiculturalism primes Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[3] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | multiculturalism —distinct-from→ assimilation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: WHETHER CULTURAL DIFFERENCE IS APPRECIATED OR IGNORED - the paper states the axis rather than leaving it to be inferred, and puts colorblindness on the ignoring side with assimilation · strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: Two edges come out of this one clause. The grouping is the part worth noting: colorblindness and assimilation are often distinguished elsewhere and are treated here as one side of a single contrast. also in: multiculturalism · assimilation | concept_edges[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | multiculturalism —distinct-from→ colorblindness Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: The second half of the same contrast, kept as its own edge because a reader searching for either model should meet the axis at the same place. also in: multiculturalism · colorblindness | concept_edges[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | multiculturalism —causes→ social distancing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. direction on the measure: reduces · strength of the relation: 0.85 · note: INDIRECT, and the paper says so: the route is through increased positive emotions, not directly. The same sentence reports the assimilation prime producing the opposite effects through negative emotions, which is the symmetry the design was built for. also in: multiculturalism · social distancing | concept_edges[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | assimilation —causes→ social distancing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. direction on the measure: increases · strength of the relation: 0.8 · note: The mirror edge, and weighted slightly lower because 'the opposite indirect effects' is stated by reference to the first result rather than reported in its own terms here.
Audit 2026-09-28: RESTORED AND DOUBTFUL - the full span was re-read; kept, but the full span does report an assimilation effect: the paper reports that the assimilation prime worked the other way, through more negative emotions, so it indirectly increased social distancing (reworded 2026-09-28 so that this note no longer quotes the paper, whose text is not cleared for redistribution) - kept, but the effect is INDIRECT (through negative emotions) and the edge's direction 'increases' holds only through that indirect path (corrected 2026-09-28: this note first said the edge carried no direction, but the edge has carried 'increases' throughout); the withdrawal said no assimilation effect was reported. The earlier withdrawal is kept in the record. also in: assimilation · social distancing | concept_edges[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | t-test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: t-test | content_tags.statistics[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | ANOVA Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ANOVA | content_tags.statistics[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | eta squared (effect size) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: eta squared (effect size) | content_tags.statistics[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | chi-squared test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: chi-squared test | content_tags.statistics[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | ANCOVA Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: ANCOVA | content_tags.statistics[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Tukey post hoc correction Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Tukey post hoc correction | content_tags.statistics[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | effect size (Cohen's d) with confidence interval Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.statistics[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Pearson correlation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Pearson correlation | content_tags.statistics[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Cronbach's alpha (internal consistency) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.statistics[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | McDonald's omega (internal consistency) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.statistics[9] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | mediation / path analysis with maximum likelihood and robust standard errors Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.statistics[10] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Monte Carlo simulation power analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. WHOSE RESULT THIS IS: Schoemann et al., 2017) with Monte Carlo simulation method showed - THE EVIDENCE FOR THIS ROW ATTRIBUTES THE WORK TO SOMEBODY ELSE. The cited name is the subject of a result verb and the sentence carries no first-person marker, so the finding, quantity or definition is the CITED author's rather than this record's. The claim is true and the quote is verbatim - what is wrong is whose result the corpus says it is. Nothing edited, nothing withdrawn: the row is marked so a page can name the source. Where the record is a commentary or review, its claim relations layer usually already names the paper being discussed - the record knows at one layer and forgets at another. | content_tags.statistics[11] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Mahalanobis distance (outlier exclusion) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.statistics[12] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | In Study 1 the multiculturalism prime lowered desire for social distance from Mainland Chinese relative to no prime, but left disgust toward culture mixing and national identity strength unchanged. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | In Study 2 the three primes produced direct effects only on emotion and on ethnic Chinese identity strength; social distancing, disgust and both identity styles showed no direct priming effect. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Relative to control, the multiculturalism prime raised positive emotion and thereby indirectly cut disgust toward culture mixing and raised ethnic identity strength, hybrid identity style and alternating identity style, with a marginal indirect reduction in social distancing. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The assimilation prime produced the mirror-image indirect pattern, lowering positive emotion and thereby increasing social distancing and disgust while decreasing ethnic identity strength and both multicultural identity styles. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Reading that Hong Kong is being assimilated into China lowered participants' ethnic identity strength compared with the control condition. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Breaking the affect composite apart, the beneficial multiculturalism effects ran specifically through pride, happiness and interest. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | multiculturalism Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: multiculturalism | content_tags.definitions[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Positive Emotion Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Positive Emotion | content_tags.definitions[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | social distance Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: social distance | content_tags.definitions[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | hybrid identity style Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: hybrid identity style | content_tags.definitions[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | alternating identity style Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: alternating identity style | content_tags.definitions[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | social distancing from Mainland Chinese Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.variables[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | disgust toward Hong Kong-Mainland culture mixing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.variables[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | multicultural identity styles Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: multicultural identity styles | content_tags.variables[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | age and gender Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: age and gender | content_tags.variables[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | n = 118 — final analysed sample of Study 1, split 57 primed and 61 no-prime Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 168 — sample size of Study 2, which the authors call slightly underpowered Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | t(116) = −2.19, p = 0.03, d = 0.40 — Study 1 effect of the multiculturalism prime on social distancing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | F(2,165) = 15.19, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.16 — overall Study 2 effect of priming condition on positive emotion Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Cohen’s d = 0.93 — size of the positive-emotion gap between the multiculturalism and assimilation prime groups Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | ω = 0.90 and α = 0.90 — internal reliability of the Study 1 social distancing scale Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[5] | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.