MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052764178 · doi:10.1177/1357034x14539357

Informal Surrogacy in China

2014· article· en· W2052764178 on OpenAlex
Jie Yang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBody & Society · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiopowerCommodificationAgency (philosophy)KinshipAmbivalenceSociologyReproductionPoliticsPower (physics)Subject (documents)Gender studiesSocial psychologyPsychologyPolitical scienceLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rather than being a form of explicitly commodified reproduction, informal surrogacy is practiced (and interpreted) in a working-class community in Beijing as part of local affective life, viewed in terms of gifting, favors, filial piety, and family concerns. Through this practice a particular form of biopower, articulated in affective terms, limits some women to serving as instruments of reproduction. Unlike the common western assumption of a physical body as separate from the experiencing subject, the Chinese body has a subjective, experiential dimension. This subjective body harbors an agency with the potential to transform the power exercised on it and to impact the circumstances of the surrogate’s life. I contextualize such agency in the analysis of the ambivalence of these women toward surrogacy and the violence of local kinship systems. Through analyzing how surrogates use their bodies to transform codes, forces and reform the self, the article suggests that informal surrogacy interacts and shapes local affective and political economies.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.274 · 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