MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Scratching the Surface: Internationalization, Cultural Diversity and the Politics of Recognition

2012· article· en· W1927116364 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Arfken

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial and Personality Psychology Compass · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternationalizationEthnocentrismUniversalismMulticulturalismGlobalizationPoliticsSociologyDiversity (politics)Focus (optics)Political scienceEpistemologySocial scienceSocial psychologyPsychologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Within recent years a number of scholars have called on the discipline of psychology to expand beyond the confines of Western society in an effort to address a range of issues in an increasingly interconnected and multicultural world. While scholars interested in the internationalization of psychology have addressed both organizational and representational issues surrounding the development of a global psychology, there has been relatively little effort to understand the theoretical dimensions of internationalization. To the extent that contextualist challenges to universalism focus exclusively on ethnocentrism, these challenges fail to adequately interrogate the economic foundations of internationalization and globalization. Ultimately, a politics of recognition must be balanced with a renewed focus on the redistributive dimensions of social justice.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.065
Scholarly communication0.0130.008
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial and Personality Psychology CompassSame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207