MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052281760 · doi:10.1080/1070289x.2014.956746

Visual and textual narratives of conflict-related displacement in Northern Ireland

2014· article· en· W2052281760 on OpenAlexaff
Katherine Side

Bibliographic record

VenueIdentities · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeDisadvantagePoliticsDisplacement (psychology)SociologyDisplaced personSocial psychologyAestheticsGender studiesPolitical sciencePsychologyArtRefugeeLawLiteraturePsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Combined textual and visual narratives and counternarratives illustrate a range of experiences in Northern Ireland’s conflictual, spatial landscape. In this article, I argue that combined textual and visual narratives about conflict-instigated displacement create and articulate community-specific experiences of disadvantage, with the intention of gaining political recognition and/or advantage over other communities in ongoing processes of conflict transformation. I expose the multiple, contextualised meanings of selective narratives that are accessible in language and image but, that are rarely questioned because of the political influence of their tellers or, because of their scale. Their meanings and intentions exist alongside counternarratives about intra-community displacement and displacement against other groups and are concurrent with public apathy, which serve to minimise their effectiveness as political tools to gain community-specific, social and political advantage. These narratives and counternarratives persist as key spatial markers and as sites on which conflict, and its effective transformation, are played out.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.015
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIdentitiesSame topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207