Discourse analysis in international development studies: Mapping some contemporary contributions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper critically examines work conducted by discourse analysts working in international development studies (IDS). During the 1990s, a number of authors introduced the study of speech, text and image as new paths toward understanding the causes of underdevelopment. This article highlights the authors who have worked on discourses on development and underdevelopment expressed by national and international governmental agencies and non-governmental organizations, scientific disciplines and specialized knowledge fields (including IDS). We focus in particular on the work of Chandra Mohanty, Arturo Escobar, James C. Scott, James Ferguson, Gilbert Rist and a selection of gender studies scholars. Beyond their differences, these discourse analysts in IDS share a rejection of mainstream analysis of underdevelopment. However, these authors remain marginalized in their own field of study and their work ought to be circulated in general discourse analysis circles.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it