MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1573103308

Introduction: A Decade of the Journal of International Women’s Studies

2008· article· en· W1573103308 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Diana Fox, Katherine Side

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of international women's studies · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipPublicityFeminismPolitical scienceGender studiesMedia studiesState (computer science)International studiesSociologyLibrary scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ten years ago, the first issue of the Journal of International Women's Studies (JIWS) was launched on the web site of the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts (MC:LA), a small, four-year, state college in northwestern Massachusetts. At the time, I (Diana Fox) was director of the Susan B. Anthony Women's Center at the College, when two seemingly disparate concerns fortunately collided leading to the creation of the JIWS. first pertained to my role as new director of the Women's Center where one of my main goals, shared by the Women's Studies faculty, was to find a way to help our Women's Studies students understand the critical link between the twin missions of feminism--scholarship and activism. A second concern emerged when I travelled to Havana, Cuba in 1998 for an international Women's Studies conference, where I learned from women faculty at the University of Havana how isolated they felt from other Women's Studies scholars around the world, because of their limited access to print publications, not to mention restrictions on their own travel. When I returned to MCLA, inspired by the potential for web publications, I created the JIWS with a group of new editors recruited from online publicity. first issue was launched in 1998, with a very local objective in mind: to assist our students in connecting the abstract theories of gender inequality to the experiences, struggles and achievements of women worldwide; and a transnational agenda: to forge international connections, understanding and opportunities through open-access web publishing. In this sense, the JIWS itself was conceived as an embodiment of scholarship and activism: we defined its mission as an effort to articulate and analyze intersectional relationships across conventional divides of global North/South publishing; Western and Third World feminisms; graduate students and established scholars; as well as encouraging feminist partnerships between women and men as comrades in struggle as bell hooks has urged in her 1984 book published by South End Press, Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center. Since moving to its new website on the Bridgewater State College server in 2000 when I assumed a tenure track position there, we have published articles from around the world, by scholars, activists and scholar-activists; by women and men and transgendered persons; by graduate students and faculty. From the beginning we sought to incorporate a wide array of multi- and interdisciplinary scholarship and a range of strategies for change harnessed by activists globally. Given this diversity of topics, one commonality running through all our articles is their analysis and challenge of taken-for-granted categories including woman and gender. One of the JIWS editors, Katherine Side, Head of the Department of Women's Studies at Memorial University, Newfoundland, Canada, who has been on the editorial board since the JIWS was founded, has the following to say about the development of the JIWS over the past decade: The inaugural issue in 1998, a slim issue which included three articles and one piece of creative work, indicated a promising start. latest issue, Volume 10, Issue 1, October 2008, collaboratively published with Wagadu: A Journal of Transnational Women's and Gender Studies, makes our links with wider feminist communities and international issues evident and points toward a continued promising future. …

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.562

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of international women's studiesSame topicHistorical Gender and Feminism StudiesFrench-language works237,207