Generation and discourse in working life stories
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following Mannheim's (1970) Problem of Generations, many scholars have warned of the analytical and political risks of conflating generation with cohort. Yet the temptation persists, as relying on cohort is a convenient method of dividing a population to study it. This article proposes that cohort is only convenient if the objective is understanding generations as definitive groups of people. It suggests a supplementary objective: understanding generation as a matter of discourse. Qualitative data from interviews with 52 Canadians illustrates how the discursive forms of generation in their stories render difference, human agency and social change in atomistic or voluntaristic terms. The most extreme manifestations of this theme appear related to the perception of generational conflict. Guided by James' principle of pragmatism, this article maintains that understanding generation as a discursive, historically contingent 'thought' with 'effects' is as important as understanding its structural form and contents.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it