MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062632036 · doi:10.1080/07393148.2014.913842

Riots in the UK: Morality, Social Imaginaries, and Conditions of Possibility

2014· article· en· W2062632036 on OpenAlex

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

VenueNew Political Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPopulism, Right-Wing Movements
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoralitySociologyPolitical scienceLaw and economicsEnvironmental ethicsPolitical economyEpistemologyLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In August 2011, rioting in UK cities captivated an international audience. This article combines empirical and theoretical work in order to examine the conditions of possibility for the riots and for the print media’s response to them. First a content analysis of fourteen British newspapers is provided to frame and criticize how the riots were portrayed. The article then turns to the conceptual framework provided by Charles Taylor’s work on social imaginaries and the modern moral order. The author argues that the media enacted the kind of moralizing impulse that Taylor helps us to understand. Conversely, that same media response is indicative of the inadequacies of Taylor’s account of morality and our imaginaries. Important features of our dominant imaginaries are neglected, such as how we identify moral fouls, along with power relations and the material conditions in which people live. Drawing on second-hand interviews with riot participants and on work by Stuart Hall, a more critical understanding of the riots is offered by viewing them in three distinct yet non-exclusive valences, specifically the transgression, culmination, and continuation of our moral order.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.355 · 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