An Investigation into the Swiftness and Intensity of Recent Secularization in Canada: Was Berger Right?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we investigate the correlates of recent secularization in Canada since the 1960s. Employing an database which evaluates a random sample of Canadians in terms of 60 beliefs and 77 values, we test seven “theories” of secularization applicable to the Canadian case using measures selected from these lists. We find that two factors emerge as critical in our models: (1) the new paradigm of individualism, together with (2) epistemic shifts related to increased pluralism and to the emergence of a more “materialistic” and evolutionary worldview (especially regarding human life). We argue that any theory seeking to explain the Canadian case must account for these factors and conclude that supply-side theory, continued social differentiation effects (as measured by urbanization), and deprivation–compensation theory all fall short of the mark as master theories explaining the Canadian case, while an interpretation of Berger's theory of pluralism holds some promise in this regard.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it