MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166883747 · doi:10.1017/s0008423907070941

As Others See Us: The Causes and Consequences of Foreign Perceptions of America

2007· article· en· W2166883747 on OpenAlex
Graham G. Dodds

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

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLeadership, Human Resources, Global Affairs
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign policyPerceptionPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsEconomic historySociologyPolitical economyPsychologyHistoryLawEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Others See Us: The Causes and Consequences of Foreign Perceptions of America , Stephen Brooks, Peterborough ON: Broadview, 2006, pp. 178. As its title indicates, As Other See Us seeks to explain how the United States of America is perceived abroad. Stephen Brooks argues that while it is more important than ever to understand how foreigners view America, academics and policymakers alike have tended to do a poor job of it, because they overemphasize what America does and underemphasize what America “is seen to be” (16). In other words, he suggests that foreign interpretations of America are at least as important as American actions or policy. For Brooks, perceptions matter a lot.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.022
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.283 · 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