Editors' note: A vision for anthropology and humanism's next three years
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Priyanka Borpujari and Rich Thornton as Multimedia Review Editors-wish to share our vision for the journal.We approach our editorial work not as a group of individual voices but as a collective, bound by a shared purpose and practice, and a commitment to working collaboratively.By valuing the process of collective insight and creativity, we infuse the journal with a cohesive spirit that pushes the boundaries of what anthropology and humanism can achieve. 1 We are deeply honored to follow in the footsteps of Helena Wulff and the other visionary editors who came before us.A&H has long been a forerunner in the realm of creative anthropology, a space where the boundaries of ethnographic storytelling have been expanded, challenged, and redefined.From its earliest days, the journal stood as a beacon for those who believed that anthropology could be as multifaceted as the human experiences it seeks to illuminate.It carved out a space where theoretical rigor did not preclude aesthetic daring, where the written word could be presented in a variety of genres, styles, and creative forms.Over the years, the specific genres of Ethnographic Poetry and Ethnographic Fiction have become the journal's main trademark-in association also with the Society of Humanistic Anthropology's annual writing prizes-supporting the long-term development of a rich disciplinary praxis in these areas.At the same time, the journal has remained open to a variety of experimental and emergent forms of writing, as well as to essays, editorials, and conversations reflecting on creative anthropological practices in relation to a variety of ethical, reflexive, and scholarly issues; addressing both their responsibilities, and their potentials.It is this legacy that we honor and seek to extend, knowing that it takes courage and care to push against convention while staying true to the core of anthropological inquiry.We aim to nurture and build upon this foundation.Our decision to work collaboratively in our editorial practice going forward enriches our vision and work, reflecting a recognition that deeper or unexpected insights can emerge where diverse voices intersect, where perspectives overlap and feed into one another.To work this way is to challenge the traditional hierarchies of academic production and to embody the kind of relational practice that anthropology itself seeks to both understand and enact.Our vision for contributors and readers of A&H is also rooted in this spirit of co-creation.We want the journal to continue to be a place where the creative, the experimental, and the rigorous coexist-a place where anthropological work can hold the fullness of human experience, including its tensions, contradictions, and flashes of joy.We aim to uphold this with processes of review and publication that complement this ethos.We see A&H not just as a repository for finished pieces but as a living archive of works that push the field forward, that speak with intention and care, in a world fractured yet vivid with potential.This, we believe, is the promise and the challenge of creative anthropology.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,028 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».