MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071316567 · doi:10.1386/jammr.2.3.241_1

L'Affaire Hérouxville in context: Conflicting narratives on Islam, Muslim women, and identity

2009· article· en· W2071316567 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel Ahadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Arab & Muslim Media Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, Gender
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamRealmMulticulturalismProclamationMainstreamContext (archaeology)Political scienceSociologyGender studiesIdentity (music)ColonialismIslamic cultureNarrativeMedia studiesLawHistoryAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In January 2007 the small town of Hérouxville in Quebec, Canada, introduced a set of codes of conduct called Normes de vie de la municipalit d'Hérouxville (Standards of Living for Residents of Hérouxville). Despite the proclamation that these rules do not target any particular religion or culture, the language of the document suggests that the Muslim community was being targeted. This article seeks to analyse the context within which dominant discourses on Islam have been developed and carried forward in western societies. I will argue that the standards are a re-articulation of a centuries-long colonial construction of the Muslim Other. They are also symptomatic of a deep-rooted commitment to cultural preservation in Quebec society that (from time to time) lends itself to xenophobic sentiments. The article makes two recommendations on how to start remedying the overwhelmingly negative image of Muslims in Canada and the rest of the western world: (1) a better representation of Muslims in the mainstream media in Canada and other western countries, and (2) a sustainable multicultural communication infrastructure that enables active participation of citizens, including immigrant groups, in the public realm.

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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Arab & Muslim Media ResearchSame topicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, GenderFrench-language works237,207