MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

White on whiteness: becoming radicalized about race

2007· review· en· W2153985274 on OpenAlexaff
Diana L. Gustafson

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Inquiry · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Race Theory in Education
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyGender studiesIdentity (music)White (mutation)HegemonySubjectivityAestheticsPoliticsPolitical scienceEpistemologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Race difference and whiteness--key elements in the construction of my cultural identity - became a focus of my reflective practice that began over 5 years ago. This article reflects critically on the production of white identity from my social location as a white nurse. My attention focused on two aspects of whiteness: the social location from which I live and learn, and the hegemonic but unmarked discourse that informs the knowledge I read and create as a researcher. My white identity is characterized by four features: the absent presence of whiteness; the need for an oppositional identity; the entitlement of choice and subjectivity; and the denial of a dominant position and relation to the racialized Other. Exploring these features is critically important at this juncture in global and professional history because of the persistence of neoliberalism and the popularity of culturalist approaches to diversity. Examining the process of my radicalization about race simultaneously calls attention to the historiography of ideas about whiteness and race difference and the institutionalization of beliefs and practices about race difference that continuously reproduce racialized identities and inform collective nursing practice and research.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing InquirySame topicCritical Race Theory in EducationFrench-language works237,207