MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Keep the Tool‐Box Open for Social Justice: Comment on Kitzinger and Wilkinson

2004· article· en· W2068834709 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

VenueAnalyses of Social Issues and Public Policy · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInjusticeStatus quoSocial injusticeSocial justiceEconomic JusticeSociologyPsychologyInequalityCriminologyWork (physics)Social psychologyLawPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We argue that psychology is not ill‐suited to confronting problems of inequality and injustice, and that psychologists are, in fact, quite capable of activist science. The parameters of psychology need to be considered as being broader than mental health pronouncements regarding various targeted minority groups. At a time when empirical claims are being wielded as tools by both sides of the same‐sex marriage debate, activist psychologists should not relinquish their own various strategies for challenging the status quo. The authors provide examples of tactics and tools that have been used and continue to be used by feminist and other progressive psychologists both to transform psychology and to work toward equality and social justice.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.377 · 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