MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986188220 · doi:10.1177/0967010611418717

Securitization and the liberalism of fear

2011· article· en· W1986188220 on OpenAlexaff
Michael C. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueSecurity Dialogue · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaGlobal Affairs Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecuritizationLiberalismPoliticsSociologyLaw and economicsPolitical scienceLawBusinessFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article seeks to extend securitization theory conceptually and, to a lesser degree, empirically by further developing the relationship between securitization and the politics of fear. Drawing on Shklar’s notion of the liberalism of fear, it argues that instead of looking at the ways in which fear can facilitate processes of securitization and the extension of security logics throughout society, the liberalism of fear allows us to see how fear can operate in ways that can actually inhibit processes of securitization. This strategy might accurately be termed ‘the securitization of securitization’, and the liberalism of fear calls attention to how the fear of fear can in a specific sense be seen as a desecuritizing resource – a countervailing logic against processes of intensification within both ‘normal’ and ‘security’ politics.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.068
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations82
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSecurity DialogueSame topicGlobal Security and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207