MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161039680 · doi:10.1080/08873267.2014.929900

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and the fate of modern scientific psychology.

2014· article· en· W2161039680 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

VenueThe Humanistic Psychologist · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicScience Education and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoanalysisPhilosophyEpistemologyPsychologyEnvironmental ethics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We note first of all that the full title of Mary Shelley's book is Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus. If we take this title as a cryptic introduction to its subject matter, we come to understand the novel as exploring the consequences of an Enlightenment project that sought to replace the classical Greek Prometheus, who was the founder of Greek religion, with a modern surrogate representing modern industrial techno-science. The ancient Greek Prometheus had sought to liberate his people by separating mortals from immortals and thereafter reuniting them by means of a festive, religious ritual. By contrast, the modern pseudo-Prometheus promised to liberate humanity by effacing the division between heaven and earth and by seeking to make the natural scientific universe the ultimate object of all cultural activity. Modern human science, including academic and scientific psychology, should be counted among the offspring of this modern and progressive Prometheus. Mary Shelley's masterpiece describes the dang...

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)0.003
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 score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.383
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