MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012211811 · doi:10.1177/006996670503900104

The kinship, marriage and gender experiences of Tamil women in Sri Lanka's tea plantations

2005· article· en· W2012211811 on OpenAlexaff
Amali Philips

Bibliographic record

VenueContributions to Indian Sociology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnthropological Studies and Insights
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinshipTamilGender studiesIdeologySri lankaSociologyPatriarchyPerspective (graphical)GeographySocioeconomicsPolitical scienceAnthropologyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The organisation of labour on tea plantations in Sri Lanka is based on a spatial, functional and ideological integration of kinship, marriage and ritual practices within a capitalist system of plantation production. This article foregrounds the household, kinship, and work experiences of women who constitute one half of the community of plantation workers of south Indian origin, to provide a balanced perspective to the discourse on south Indian kinship systems and practices. Its focus is on the reinforcement of kinship and gender inequalities within households and within the plantation labour organisation. In privileging women's experiences of kinship and marriage, this article adds to recent studies on kinship and gender in India that challenge the more traditional accounts based on androcentric perspectives, geographical generalisations, and the essentialisation of women.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.355
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContributions to Indian SociologySame topicAnthropological Studies and InsightsFrench-language works237,207