MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999513148 · doi:10.1353/crv.2010.0014

Exorcistes américains : la Heritage Foundation , la guerre culturelle et la sauvegarde du mariage et des valeurs familiales traditionnelles

2010· article· en· W1999513148 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Frédérick Gagnon, Catherine Goulet-Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of American Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVietnamese History and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the Republican Party's national convention in 1992, Pat Buchanan claimed that a "culture war" was raging in the United States. While Buchanan described this "war" as a "struggle for the soul of America," we use the culture-war concept to refer to the efforts of various conservative political and social actors trying to protect US traditional values and to "exorcise" the liberal and secular "demons" of the United States. Accordingly, this paper focuses on one of these actors: the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank located in Washington, DC. Performing a postructuralist discursive analysis of various "texts" produced by three scholars from the Heritage about marriage, family values, and sexuality, the paper shows how these scholars strategically rely on certain words and expressions in their research in order to reach two political goals: (1) marginalize liberal views on the issues just mentioned; and (2) discipline Americans by leading them to embrace a traditional/conservative interpretation of US national identity. Lors de son discours à la convention nationale du parti républicain durant les présidentielles américaines de 1992, le conservateur Pat Buchanan affirmait qu'une « guerre culturelle » fait rage aux États-Unis. Décrit comme un combat pour définir l'identité nationale américaine, le concept de la guerre culturelle est utilisé ici pour désigner les efforts menés par divers acteurs conservateurs pour protéger les valeurs traditionnelles de la société américaine et « exorciser » celle-ci de ce qu'ils considèrent être des « démons » libéraux et séculiers. Le présent texte se penche sur l'un de ces acteurs : la Heritage Foundation , un centre de recherche privé ( think tank ) conservateur situé à Washington D.C. À l'aide d'une analyse de discours post-structuraliste des études produites par trois chercheurs de la Heritage à propos du mariage, des valeurs familiales et de la sexualité, ce texte vise à illustrer que ces mêmes chercheurs articulent leurs discours de manière à atteindre un but politique : (1) marginaliser les positions progressistes sur les enjeux susmentionnés ; et (2) discipliner les Américains en les incitant à embrasser une vision traditionnelle/conservatrice de l'identité américaine.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.308 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of American StudiesSame topicVietnamese History and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207