The Understanding About “Reflexivity: In the Risk Society: Based on the Interpretation of Giddens’s Modernity Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is universally acknowledged that the risk society has occurred. In this era which is filled with modernity, we see a different outline of the social order of the past one. Under the vision of risk society, Giddens has pointed out, “We are living in a more reflective age than ever before, and the reflexivity was put with various characteristics. As a result, he has regarded the modernity as “risk society”. Furthermore, he rethought and reconstructed the modernity that is different from the traditional, which is based on the sociology theories of Marx, Durkheim, Weber and other classical theorists. In Giddens’s view, three kinds of force drive the modern social transformation to be finished, such as the separation and recombination of time and space, the disembedding mechanism and reflexivity for social structure. This paper attempts to analyze the modernity problems through Giddens’s social theory system and lays emphasis on the reflexivity on a social and individual level. What’s more, the author will discuss how to deal with the relationship between the individuals and the society, which may lead to a happier and safer social order.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.057 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".