MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081270131 · doi:10.1353/crv.2004.0007

"Uncle Sam Wants You. .. to Go Shopping": A Consumer Society Responds to National Crisis, 1957-2001

2004· article· en· W2081270131 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert H. Zieger

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of American Studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Political and Social Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCold warAdversaryPolitical scienceHistoryPentagonSoviet unionEconomic historyPolitical economyLawSociologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the spring of 2002, columnist William Pfaff contrasted what he saw as Americans' over-reaction to the events of September 11, 2001, with their steadfast behaviour during the Cold War. Despite the Soviet challenge and the threat of thermonuclear war, he asserted, "There was never much anxiety in the United States about future events, or fear of enemy attack, during the Cold War ... ." But Pfaff's memory seemed to have failed him, for at least one major Cold War episode did evoke fear of physical attack and doubts about national survival. Ironically, it was not a military action that triggered it but rather an ostensibly peaceful, scientific demonstration. On October 4, 1957, the Soviet Union launched the first earth satellite, dubbed "Sputnik," and thereby aroused both an immediate panic and a longer-range reassessment of America's character, goals, and purposes, both reminiscent of and intriguingly different from the country's reaction to the assaults on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of American StudiesSame topicAmerican Political and Social DynamicsFrench-language works237,207