MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128284528 · doi:10.1111/1467-9248.00346

Sowing Dragon's Teeth: Public Support for Political Violence and Paramilitarism in Northern Ireland

2001· article· en· W2128284528 on OpenAlexaff
Bernadette C. Hayes, Ian McAllister

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Studies · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear decommissioningPoliticsPolitical violencePopulationCriminologyPolitical sciencePolitical economySociologyLawEngineeringDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While much attention has been devoted to political efforts to solve the Northern Ireland problem, less attention has been given to the role of political violence in sustaining the conflict. We argue that one of the reasons for the intractability of the conflict is widespread exposure to political violence among the civil population. By 1998, thirty years after the conflict started, one in seven of the population reported being a victim of violence; one in five had a family member killed or injured; and one in four had been caught up in an explosion. Such widespread exposure to violence exists alongside latent support for paramilitarism among a significant minority of both communities. Using 1998 survey data, we show that exposure to violence serves to enhance public support for paramilitary groups, as well as to reduce support for the decommissioning of paramilitary weapons. Overall, the results suggest that only a lengthy period without political violence will undermine support for paramilitarism and result in the decommissioning of weapons.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.360
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations160
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical StudiesSame topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207