Bibliographic record
Abstract
Having considered the evidence for a ‘decline’ in civic participation and assessed its validity for women, in particular, through a close examination of the eleven relevant civic associations, we turn to consider in this chapter the causes that Putnam suggests are behind the ‘collapse’ of American community. Given that the previous chapter concluded that there may not be a decline in civic participation at all so much as a change, one might well ask: why bother with Putnam's causal explanations at all? There are two reasons. First, in addition to the decline in participation, Putnam's analysis is also attempting to provide a causal explanation for a decline in trust (the other critical component of social capital). As the following chapter argues, while participation may only have changed, generalized trust has clearly declined; to the extent that Putnam's analysis might provide explanations for this decline (or not) makes my analysis of ‘causes’ in this chapter necessary. Secondly, it is important to analyse these causal explanations in their own terms to see if they hold together logically based on the studies provided (television), to compare them in relation to competing theories (generational change) and to make explicit any assumptions implicit within the analysis that might have an adverse impact on women or cultural minorities (dual-career families).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".