MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069055560 · doi:10.3138/jrpc.22.3.002

Christian Teens and Biblezines: An Analysis of <i>Revolve, The Complete New Testament</i>

2010· article· en· W2069055560 on OpenAlex
Hillary Kaell

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion and Popular Culture · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicViolence, Religion, and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNew TestamentReading (process)SocializationSociologyPrincipal (computer security)Religious studiesAestheticsLiteraturePhilosophyPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Released in 2003, Revolve was the first “Biblezine”, a format that combined scripture with a teen magazine. It sold extraordinarily well and spawned a series of copycats. This essay argues that previous scholarly analyses of Christian and secular teen magazines do not provide an adequate framework for understanding this new genre. A close reading of Revolve reveals a complicated pattern of socialization, where inerrant scripture interacts with pop culture. Revolve teaches and reinforces in its teenage readers two principal cultural norms: the process of engaging with and “filtering” secular messages and a method of communication that follows a redemptive sin-confess-repent cycle. The essay concludes by discussing Walter Benjamin’s concept of “aura” and questioning whether the Biblezine is powerful for teens due to its very reproducibility.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.224 · 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