MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4360972824 · doi:10.1353/lm.2022.0025

Apprehensions of a Canon: Literature and Medicine 2013–2022

2022· article· en· W4360972824 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna Fenton-Hathaway

Notice bibliographique

RevueLiterature and medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueEmpathy and Medical Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCanonLiteratureMeditationSentenceSpace (punctuation)PhilosophyPsychologyHistoryLinguisticsArtTheology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Apprehensions of a Canon:Literature and Medicine 2013–2022 Anna Fenton-Hathaway (bio) Space, through translation, connects, whereas time, through the canon, divides. —Marta Arnaldi, early draft of "Illness as a Foreign Tongue" The claim in the epigraph is meant to be experienced by readers in a certain mood. Lyrical and nervy, it withholds direct objects (connects whom? divides what?) to preserve its rhythm, brief but hypnotic; its function is not to prove but to propose. When I first approached the sentence, I was not in this mood. I was copy-editing an early draft of the essay by Marta Arnaldi that appears in this issue of the journal, and I read it like a fact-checker: "Has this been shown in this essay? Or by [Julia] Kristeva? I know it was asserted on p. 5, but it feels like such a big claim (!). Wouldn't the canon-makers say that the canon connects us through time?" In response, the author gamely adjusted the second half of her sentence, adding a reference to a longer publication where she expands this meditation on space, translation, connection, time, division, and the canon. Yet the original version—time, through the canon, divides—has stuck with me. Reflecting on a near-decade with Literature and Medicine, I find that both its terms and its slightly disorienting effect help me ask genuine questions about the work we've published in that time. Is a canon visible in those twenty issues, or in the forty total volumes of Literature and Medicine? Would such a canon be a critical one—a set of models for looking at any text or structure—or a creative one—a set of fiction and nonfiction texts available to be analyzed or celebrated by various methods, according to evolving motivations? And if there is a canon here, or even a series of canons, what are their effects, and on whom? [End Page 235] Data collected by Project Muse, the online subscription-based platform where Literature and Medicine appears, may offer some preliminary answers. For three months in 2020 Muse made its content entirely open access, in part to ensure existing subscribers could continue their research when their schools and libraries were in lockdown. Over this period our journal's hits and downloads increased fourfold. Muse's usage report also includes an "institutions tab" indicating where those hits and downloads come from. During the open-access period, the top institution by far (separated from the second-place Auckland University of Technology by more than 65,000 hits) was "no institution." It is of course likely that thousands of these "no institution" readers were affiliated scholars accessing the platform from home, thus realizing Project Muse's main goal. But the rise in unaffiliated readership is too steep to consist solely of homebound North American professors. (Of the top twenty institutions listed after Auckland, eight are indeed in the US, with four in the UK and four more in Canada—but universities from the Netherlands, Sweden, and Brazil are also listed.) Across more spaces, then, a pandemic attracted more readers to Literature and Medicine. In this case, the canon connected: the 2018 theme issue on "Chemistry, Disability, and Frankenstein" was our most accessed issue, featuring history of science and disability studies approaches to Mary Shelley's 200-year-old novel. Other essays—on the 1918 influenza pandemic, on metaphors for Alzheimer's disease, on Ken Kesey's One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and on Virginia Woolf's On Being Ill—also appear among the top twenty articles for this period; why thousands of new readers chose these essays is clear in some cases, less so in others. But the interest in Frankenstein validates the terms Arnaldi has provided us, if not her equation. Time, so far, has not managed to distance Frankenstein's central questions—about grief, innovation, community, prejudice, and responsibility—from an ever-changing cast of contemporary issues. What time has made possible, however, is an increasing number of translations of the novel, into languages from Arabic, Bengali, and Chinese to Malay.1 These translations, and the many adaptations of Frankenstein into various media, have in turn created more opportunities for...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,531
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,871

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,011
Tête enseignante GPT0,293
Écart entre enseignants0,282 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueLiterature and medicineMême sujetEmpathy and Medical EducationTravaux en français237 207