MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018206977 · doi:10.7202/800546ar

The Ambiguities of Disciplinary Professionalization: The State and Cultural Dynamics of Canadian Inter-war Anthropology

2009· article· en· W2018206977 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrew Nurse

Bibliographic record

VenueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnthropology: Ethics, History, Culture
Canadian institutionsMount Allison University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisciplineProfessionalizationScholarshipSociologyState (computer science)Applied anthropologyAnthropologySocial sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The professionalization of Canadian anthropology in the first half of the twentieth century was tied closely to the matrix of the federal state, first though the Anthropology Division of the Geological Survey of Canada and then the National Museum. State anthropologists occupied an ambiguous professional status as both civil servants and anthropologists committed to the methodological and disciplinary imperatives of modern social science but bounded and guided by the operation of the civil service. Their position within the state served to both advance disciplinary development but also compromised disciplinary autonomy. To address the boundaries the state imposed on its support for anthropology, state anthropologists cultivated cultural, intellectual, and commercially-oriented networks that served to sustain new developments in their field, particularly in folklore. This essay examines these dynamics and suggests that anthropology's disciplinary development did not create a disjuncture between professionalized scholarship and civil society.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.141
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientia Canadensis Canadian Journal of the History of Science Technology and MedicineSame topicAnthropology: Ethics, History, CultureFrench-language works237,207