MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320045720 · doi:10.1386/eme.12.3-4.159_1

Mind and media: Exploring the Freud-McLuhan connection

2013· article· en· W2320045720 on OpenAlex
Adriana Braga, Robert K. Logan

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

VenueExplorations in Media Ecology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Communication, and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParallelsUnconscious mindPsychePsychoanalysisSubliminal stimuliPhilosophyEpistemologySociologyPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this article we examine the thesis that Sigmund Freud might have had a possible influence on the thinking of Marshall McLuhan. We also develop the parallels in their thinking. The first hint of this connection is that McLuhan frequently refers to Freud in his writings. The second hint is that both men were battling invisible forces - unnoticed or subliminal effects of media for McLuhan and repressed memories and the unconscious for Freud. We present this hypothesis as a probe, which we believe has some degree of truth to it given the frequency with which McLuhan referred to and quoted Freud. Even if it is not true it is still illuminating to see the parallels of these two revolutionary thinkers who explored the workings of the human psyche from two completely different perspectives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.346
Threshold uncertainty score0.897

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.216 · 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