MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1601182341 · doi:10.3138/topia.20.129

Bullying in U.S. Public Culture: Or, Gothic Terror in the Full Light of Day

2008· article· en· W1601182341 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Roddey Reid

Bibliographic record

VenueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntimidationPoliticsLegitimacySovereigntyCriminologyScapegoatingProscriptionPolitical scienceSociologySocial psychologyPsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article expands the conventional analysis of bullying and intimidation in U.S. daily life beyond family, household and school dynamics to the workplace, the media, and the world of politics. Although a universal problem, bullying enjoys a virulence and prevalence in contemporary U.S. culture virtually unmatched anywhere else in terms of its reach, depth, and legitimacy. Unlike in many European nations and Canada it is not illegal, and although a subject of endless commentary in the U.S. press it is little studied and consequently little understood as a politics of abject subjecthood consisting in the practice of humiliating others, primarily in terms of stigmatizing gender and sexual stereotypes. What is singular in the current reign of the bully is that the multiple contexts of the return of violent sovereignty in daily life and politics, neoliberal economic policies, and the War on Terror can convert the temporary experience of unwanted acts of aggression into a one of a permanent sense of weakness, self-loathing, and a perpetual fear of potential psychological or physical assaults resulting in political paralysis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.018
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural StudiesSame topicCrime, Deviance, and Social ControlFrench-language works237,207