MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2305887172 · doi:10.14288/1.0064463

Constructing the Canadian teenager : the Star Weekly Magazine and representations of the young during the late 1940s

2009· article· en· W2305887172 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lorraine Caroline Snowden

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the postwar era has attracted a great deal of attention in recent years, the experience of young Canadians through the late 1940s has been largely overlooked. As a result, the postwar phenomenon of teen culture, and construction of the Canadian teenager, have relied heavily on American interpretations. This thesis, by examining the Canadian scene, suggests the beginnings of another perspective on the postwar positioning of adolescence in the English-speaking world. Focussing on the immediate postwar years (1945-1950), representations of young people will be assessed through a popular medium, The Star Weekly Magazine. If the opinions reflected in this widely distributed Canadian periodical are any indication, attitudes were shifting dramatically through these years. In the immediate aftermath of war, the development of Canada's young was rarely addressed by Star writers. By 1950, the subject was front and centre. Driven by developments in the field of mental health, Star contributors grew preoccupied with the construction of well-balanced citizens. Young Canadians were at the centre of this movement. If young people matured over a longer period of time, they would be less likely to follow in the wayward path of parents. This was the message relayed through Star writings during the late 1940s. While presented in progressive terms, as an opportunity for young people to internalize essential values and develop social skills, The Star's emerging ideal was somewhat of a mixed blessing. In contrast to earlier counterparts, Canada's postwar teenagers were to be continuously monitored and subject to the dictates of parents.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0430.019
Scholarly communication0.0130.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→