MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1922800997 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2016v41n1aa3063

Getting It Right: Canadian Conservatives and the “War on Science” [Preliminary Edition]

2015· article· en· W1922800997 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Elyse Amend, Darin Barney

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)Prime ministerIdeologyHumanitiesLawPoliticsArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critics have paid considerable attention to the Conservative government’s record on science and technology. Cuts to funding and resources in these sectors, numerous environmentally-questionable policies, and charges of information control over Canada’s scientific community have served as evidence for many that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government and its supporters mobilize an “anti-science” ideology and are engaged in a “war on science.” However, the government has continued to make financial and rhetorical investments into science and technology to promote economic prosperity and boost Canadian national identity based on “innovation.” This article investigates the claim that Canadian Conservatives are “anti-science,” and asks whether this label is an adequate appraisal of the Canadian Right’s disposition toward science, or is beneficial to discussions on science and the public interest.Les critiques ont porté une attention spéciale à la fiche du gouvernement conservateur sur la science et la technologie. Les compressions budgétaire dans l’allocation des ressources dans ces secteurs, les nombreuses politiques douteuse portant sur l'environnement, et les plaintes de contrôle de l'information sur la communauté scientifique canadienne ont servi comme preuve pour plusieurs que le gouvernement du premier ministre Stephen Harper et ses partisans mobilisent une idéologie «antiscience» et sont engagés dans une guerre contre la science. Cependant, le gouvernement a continué de faire des investissements financiers et rhétoriques dans la science et la technologie afin de promouvoir la prospérité économique et de renforcer l'identité nationale canadienne fondée sur «l'innovation». Cet article examine l’allégation que les conservateurs canadiens sont «antiscience» et se demande si celle-ci est une évaluation adéquate de la disposition du droit du Canada envers la science, ou est bénéfique pour les discussions sur la science et l'intérêt public.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0430.010
Scholarly communication0.0150.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0100.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

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
Published2015
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CommunicationSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207