Bibliographic record
Abstract
An integral element of most British kitchens, refrigerators support daily practices of social reproduction, but tend to blend almost unnoticed into the background. Drawing in particular on feminist social theorists and historians of technology, my research pays critical attention to mundane objects, domestic practices and the stories that they tell. This paper pauses to take a closer look at a usually unobtrusive appliance in, on and around which much of kitchen life plays out. I examine processes of domesticating, gendering, appropriating and rescripting the refrigerator. I consider how associations with women's traditional responsibilities for feeding, nourishing and caring feminise the fridge, how 'scripts' for objects and technologies encourage users to behave in certain ways, but also how those scripts can be rewritten. Looking at the sometimes unexpected ways in which technologies evolve, I note that as well as being an instrument for preserving food, the fridge has become normalised as a notice board for household communication, creative self-expression and display. I then turn to the metaphorical rescripting of 'the fridge door' and its translation into virtual space to explore how the refrigerator has come to represent an accessible and participatory space for multiple voices and diverse knowledges.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".