MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118522997 · doi:10.1177/0010414012453035

Explaining Policy Outcomes

2012· article· en· W2118522997 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

VenueComparative Political Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatin AmericansPoliticsLegislationArgument (complex analysis)Political scienceSocial policyPolitical economyPublic administrationField (mathematics)SociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past decade, several Latin American jurisdictions have extended rights to sexual minorities. Yet political science attention to this development has been scant, and scholars know little about the factors that have led to these unprecedented policy changes. This article fills this gap and explains policy outcomes in a notoriously understudied policy area by comparing the two jurisdictions in Latin America that were the first to adopt same-sex unions: Buenos Aires and Mexico City. The article first argues for the usefulness of engaging theoretical approaches to the study of social mobilization in policy analyses. Based on extensive field research, it subsequently advances the argument that the passage of these pieces of legislation in both cities is largely the result of the ability of very-well-organized activists to present an effectively framed policy within rare and favorable political conditions.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.407
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.135 · 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