MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024127403 · doi:10.1080/14747730903141928

Competing Autonomy Claims and the Changing Grammar of Global Politics

2009· article· en· W2024127403 on OpenAlexafffund
Diana Brydon

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobalizations · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Philosophy and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of WaterlooSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsAutonomyPoliticsMulticulturalismSociologySovereigntyFraming (construction)DemocracyHumanitiesPolitical scienceHuman rightsLawGender studiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article argues that contending ideas about autonomy lie behind current discourses of human rights, claims to nation-state and cultural autonomy, and democracy promotion. Globalizing processes are bringing these contested understandings of autonomy, and their often silent framing within assumptions about sovereignty, into a new prominence. Locating itself within agonistic views of autonomy and politics, the article argues that it is necessary to pay closer attention to the perspectives that feminist and postcolonial analyses bring to understanding how autonomy, community, culture, and nation are co-constructed within imaginaries, such as liberal multiculturalism, that are no longer adequate to current demands for justice. To succeed, this renewed attention needs to locate itself within an effort to rethink academic community and the research protocols and collaborative practices this community permits and legitimizes. Este artículo sostiene que las ideas contendientes sobre la autonomía yacen detrás de las disertaciones actuales sobre los derechos humanos, las declaraciones de nación-estado y autonomía cultural y la promoción de la democracia. Los procesos de globalización están conduciendo estos entendimientos contradictorios de autonomía y sus encuadramientos generalmente silenciosos, dentro de las suposiciones sobre la soberanía, a un nuevo nivel de importancia. Este artículo que se ubica a sí mismo bajo una perspectiva ardua de autonomía y política, argumenta que es necesario poner mayor atención a las perspectivas que traen los análisis feministas y postcoloniales para entender cómo la autonomía, la comunidad, la cultura y la nación se han co-construído de manera imaginaria, tales como el multiculturalismo liberal que ya no son adecuadas para las demandas actuales de justicia. Para lograr el éxito, esta atención renovada debe situarse dentro de un esfuerzo para replantear a la comunidad académica, los protocolos de investigación y las prácticas colaborativas que esta comunidad permite y legaliza.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.063
Scholarly communication0.0130.012
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.005
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 head0.328
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobalizationsSame topicPolitical Philosophy and EthicsFrench-language works237,207