MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166439271 · doi:10.3138/cras.40.2.133

“We All Go a Little Mad Sometimes”: Alfred Hitchcock, American Psychoanalysis, and the Construction of the Cold War Psychopath

2010· article· en· W2166439271 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert Genter

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of American Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCold warPsychoanalysisPhilosophyLiteratureArt historyPsychologyArtLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the image of the psychopath in Alfred Hitchcock’s 1960 film Psycho. The famed director’s portrayal of a psychologically damaged young man connected with a much larger discussion over political and sexual deviance in the early Cold War, a discussion that cantered on the image of the psychopath as the dominant threat to national security and that played upon normative assumptions about adolescent development and mother-son relations.

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)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.042
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.320 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of American StudiesSame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207