MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1581704712

Drinking and Healing: Reflections on the Lost Autonomy of the Innu

2001· article· en· W1581704712 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Colin Samson

Bibliographic record

VenueKU ScholarWorks (The University of Kansas) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyPoliticsPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)Power (physics)GeographyHistoryLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heavy drinking has been a feature of the village lives of the Innu people of Labrador ever since they were coerced to abandon permanent nomadic hunting in the 1950s and 1960s, when the government-built villages of Sheshatshiu and Davis Inlet (or Utshimassits) were created. The process of sedentarization has accompanied a removal of the people from the hunting life in the interior of Labrador (known as the country or nutshimit), incurring a serious loss of meaning, purpose and autonomy. To combat heavy drinking, the Canadian authorities have imported into the Innu villages both pan-Native healing organizations and their own social services and criminal justice institutions. The Innu, through their political body, the Innu Nation, have also developed Healing Services. In these reflections, which are derived from my work with the Innu since 1994, I examine various approaches to healing and look at the experiences of some Innu with drinking. Paradoxically, although drinking is very often destructive, it can also be a form of emotional sharing, protest against assimilation and power to drinkers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0420.051
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0040.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKU ScholarWorks (The University of Kansas)Same topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207