Bibliographic record
Abstract
In "The Possession of Elizabeth Knapp," Samuel Willard observed and wrote about the afflictions of Elizabeth Knapp, but his report is not without flaws.Willard framed his report on Elizabeth Knapp's affliction as a narrative of himself, a self-portrayed holy figure, facing off against the devil, an evil creature possessing a powerless young woman.Willard does this by discounting Knapp's own experiences and by framing her as a character without agency.His report is also affected by his privilege, which causes him to disregard and dehumanize Knapp in the narrative.Overall, Willard's report comes off as an argument for the existence of diabolism-Knapp's diabolism, in particular-that is rooted in patriarchal values.Therefore, Willard's summary of events is questionably reliable, and historians should take caution when approaching it as a factual account of Knapp's affliction.Willard, despite his good intentions, consistently asserted his authority over Knapp in his writings.Often, as a way of doing this, he doubted her and believed her to be lying, and even from the beginning of Knapp's condition, he questioned her.When she first began to act strangely by shrieking and laughing at odd moments, many would ask her how she was, and she would reply, "well" " (Willard 235).Willard wrote that this answer made him "wonder," not trusting his sixteen-year-old servant (Willard 235).As it turned out, of course, he was correct to wonder, but that he was right about this suspicion does not matter as much as that after looking back on the incident, early on he believed that something was wrong with Knapp, even if she would not admit to it.Again and again he questioned her personal accounts of what happened, claiming that they "seemed contradictory," that he was "suspecting the truth of her former story" and that he had "a suspicion of the truth of the relation" (Willard 237, 238, 242).Willard addressed the discrepancies of her stories, mainly those concerning whether or not she had covenanted with the devil, at the end of his report, writing, "Her declarations have been so
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".