MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037521282 · doi:10.7202/045219ar

Margaret Mead’s Coming of Age in Ethnography

2011· article· en· W2037521282 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jacqueline A. McLeod

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnologies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPostmodernismEthnographyReading (process)SociologyPersonaPortraitPopularityAestheticsCriticismLiteratureArtPsychologyAnthropologyArt historySocial psychologyLinguisticsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A lightening rod for an array of criticism, Coming of Age in Samoa also attained monumental popularity with both scholarly and popular reading audiences, convincing many that it captured the sexual and social lives of Samoan adolescent girls and that North American girls might be instructed by this portrait. Taking a “recovery and reappraisal” approach, this article argues that the text is neither a collection of detailed, field note-anchored observations nor a cross cultural critique, but a love story to place. The text has much in common with postmodern conceptions of ethnography, which acknowledge “writing culture” as mediated by interpretive, representational and linguistic considerations. Like many postmodern ethnographers, Mead self-consciously constructs an authorial position rather than attempting to remain absent and objective. Part of the persona she constructs is that she is a scientist sharing data; yet she no sooner invokes standards of scientific rigor than she shifts course to promise us a good “tale”. If contemporary readers can read the text through a postmodern lens, when she wrote, her approach was unprecedented. Her awareness of transgressing scientific method emerges in the “Introduction” to the book, where she self-reflects on her decisions about authorship as performance and text as storied, artful and intimate.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.479
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.048 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnologiesSame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207