MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090372987 · doi:10.1111/1468-2435.00145

The Dark Side of Democracy: Migration, Xenophobia and Human Rights in South Africa

2001· article· en· W2090372987 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

VenueInternational Migration · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsXenophobiaHuman rightsRefugeeDemocracySeriousnessPolitical sciencePoliticsConventionTortureGreat RiftDevelopment economicsLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

South Africa prides itself on having one of the most progressive constitutions in the world. The Bill of Rights guarantees a host of basic political, cultural and socio‐economic rights to all who are resident in the country. Yet there have been persistent reports that citizen intolerance of non‐citizens, refugees and migrants has escalated dramatically since 1994. This article documents this process through presentation of results of national public opinion surveyed by the Southern African Migration Project (SAMP). The surveys show that intolerance is extremely pervasive and growing in intensity and seriousness. Abuse of migrants and refugees has intensified and there is little support for the idea of migrant rights. Only one group of South Africans, a small minority with regular personal contact with non‐citizens, is significantly more tolerant. These findings do not augur well for migrant and refugee rights in this newly democratic country, or early acceptance of the UN Convention on the protection of migrant workers.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.266 · 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