MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2280426597

An American Evangelical Missionary's Responses to the Africanization of Christianity: Mabel Easton Buyse in the Lake Albert Region, 1917-1936

2013· article· en· W2280426597 on OpenAlexaff
Anne Vermeyden

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Society, and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChristianityFaithContext (archaeology)HistoryReligious studiesEthnologyTheologyArchaeologyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evangelical American Africa Inland Mission (AIM) missionary Mabel Easton Buyse arrived in the region north of Uganda's Lake Albert in 1917. Between 1917-1936, her diaries and letters reveal that she experienced shifts in her understanding of Christianity as she witnessed East Africans adopt Christianity into their own cultural contexts. During this period, Easton Buyse came to accept the validity of African styles of Christian leadership and modesty because of her contact with the Africanization of Christianity. At the same time, her contact with Africanized Christianity reinforced her condemnation of many African cultural practices including polygamy and traditional mourning rites. Easton Buyse's experience of African Christian practice impacted her understanding of what appropriate Christian practices could be. Her experience also highlights how African Christians made the European forms of Christianity offered to them by missionaries their own by adopting Christian ideas into their own cultural frameworks. Her responses to different African understandings of Christianity during her time as a missionary are an example of how faith is constantly on the move in the context of mission: both within new cultural contexts, and within missionaries themselves.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0250.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicReligion, Society, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207