Joy Parr, Domestic Goods: The Material, The Moral, and the Economic in the Postwar Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a Wal-mart advertisement currently in circulation, which uses an interview format to promote the store. A homemaker, her husband a member of the Canadian Forces, recounts how in the past few years she and her family have had to relocate several times to various Canadian cities. In the midst of these displacements, she regains her equilibrium as soon as she locates the nearest Wal-mart, whose very presence is familiar and comforting. She can rest assured, then, that the needs and desires of her family can be met. This advertisement can be read in a number of ways. The premise, and the assumption, are that Canadian consumers find gratification in shopping at Wal-mart — that its sales, promotional and corporate strategies, its contents, and its ethos, are readily accepted by the people who buy things there. Purchasers appreciate having ready and routine access to commodities that they need and want. Their buying inclinations are not compromised by their being left alone to make choices without the ready advice, not to mention sales-pitch, of sales associates. And, customers' purchasing practices are, on the whole, unaffected by the fact that there is a basic uniformity in the goods carried by Wal-marts throughout North America, derived from practices related to economy of scale. In other words, personal satisfaction and a sense of accomplishment are gained through the frequent acquisition of relatively small-scale goods (the store does not carry major appliances or very much furniture); those goods contribute to the well-being of a family, whose members are able to bestow, upon these objects, value as markers which give the sensation of home; and if, indeed, there are major differences between the taste and desires of Canadian and American Wal-mart customers, these differences can be accommodated without dramatically changing the format of the store or the nature of the stock that it carries.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".