MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W22695971 · doi:10.1007/s10899-012-9322-0

For the children's souls: Child, church and community in Indiana, 1801–1851

2009· article· en· W22695971 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin L. Gooding

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gambling Studies · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By examining the religious education of children in six Indiana towns—Delphi, Evansville, Lafayette, Madison, Richmond, and Rising Sun—this study attempts to illuminate the attitudes of the English-speaking, Protestant parents of these communities toward the rapid changes then occurring in each town. Improved transportation networks brought both population increases and greater access to goods produced elsewhere and distant markets for local goods. New ideas, new opportunities, and new goods presented religious parents with the task of how to teach their children to reap the benefits of their towns’ inclusion in a growing capitalist society, while avoiding the spiritual dangers contained therein. Within the context of the church, the Sunday school, and home-based family worship, these adults accomplished this by instilling in their impressionable children the habits of industry and economy, reverence for the Sabbath, and teaching them how to make correct choices regarding friends, associates, and amusements. In addition, early Indiana remained a dangerous place in which to grow to adulthood, as a spectrum of diseases claimed a disproportionate number of children under the age of ten. By utilizing the image of the Pious Dying Child, Hoosier parents kept the specter of childhood death before their children’s eyes as an encouragement to seek conversion as early in life as possible.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.550

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gambling StudiesSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207