The persistence of conflict avoidance among the King Island Inupiat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the summers of 2005 and 2006, a group of Ugiuvangmiut (King Island Inupiat) and western scientists participated in a project entitled “Documenting the Cultural Geography, Biogeography, and Traditional Ecological Knowledge of King Island, Alaska.” The intent was to bring Ugiuvangmiut to King Island in order to document and map place names, as well as archaeological and subsistence sites. Throughout fieldwork, conflicts occurred between scientists, between community members, and between scientists and community members. As the principal investigator, I confronted one conflict in 2005, but my actions exacerbated long-standing tensions within the community and I was later advised by two community members that I should not have confronted the conflict. When conflict occurred again in 2006, instead of confronting the conflict, I chose to take a break from the project for several days. The result was that the overt conflict within the community lessened. Based upon these experiences and other examples, I conclude that conflict avoidance still persists among the Ugiuvangmiut. In addition, I “write against culture” (to borrow Abu-Lughod’s phrase) to explain how my mixed ethnic background and the backgrounds of two community members resulted in actions that run counter to conflict avoidance, showing that there are “multiple, shifting, and competing” cultural values at play. I end with suggestions for scientists conducting fieldwork in the North.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".