MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101628605 · doi:10.1177/1368430200031002

Human Rights and Politics: A Social Representational Analysis of Political Positioning during the 1995 Quebec Sovereignty Campaign

2000· article· en· W2101628605 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGroup Processes & Intergroup Relations · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Intergroup Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsSovereigntyReferendumSocioeconomic statusValue (mathematics)Social psychologyEnforcementHuman rightsPolitical scienceSociologyPsychologyLawPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This questionnaire study was conducted among 202 French-speaking students one month before the 1995 referendum on sovereignty in Quebec. Principal questions concerned: intervention of human rights (HR) attitudes; value priorities; expectations about enforcement and violation of rights (individual/collective) in political choices; and sovereignty representations (for/against). It was found that HR attitudes did not intervene in political choices, but that concerns about well-being and traditional values were linked to Non-Sovereigntist attitudes, whereas social value choices accompanied Pro-Sovereigntist ones. Furthermore, respondents generally thought that, in the outcome of their choice, socioeconomic and collective rights would be better respected; whereas, when confronted with an outcome contrary to their choice, Pro-Sovereigntists expected more political and linguistic discrimination.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.308 · 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