MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1639796823 · doi:10.21083/irss.v37i0.1950

To Converse with the Devil? Speech, Sexuality, and Witchcraft in Early Modern Scotland

2012· article· en· W1639796823 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sierra Rose Dye

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Scottish Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies of British Isles
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersecutionHuman sexualityWitchConverseHistoryPower (physics)MonopolyState (computer science)Period (music)SociologyGender studiesLawPolitical scienceAestheticsArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In early modern Scotland, thousands of people were accused and tried for the crime of witchcraft, many of whom were women. This paper examines the particular qualities associated with witches in Scottish belief – specifically speech and sexuality – in order to better understand how and why the witch hunts occurred. This research suggests that the growing emphasis on the words of witches during this period was a reflection of a mounting concern over the power and control of speech in early modern society. In looking at witchcraft as a speech crime, it is possible to explain not only why accused witches were more frequently women, but also how the persecution of individuals – both male and female – functioned to ensure that local and state authorities maintained a monopoly on powerful speech.

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)0.002
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 score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.303

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of Scottish StudiesSame topicHistorical Studies of British IslesFrench-language works237,207