MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409551951 · doi:10.1163/18763324-04302006

How to Make Good Kids with Books: Post-Soviet Parenting and the Commodification of Children’s Literature

2016· article· en· W2409551951 on OpenAlex
Anastasia Rogova

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

VenueThe Soviet and Post-Soviet Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommodificationContext (archaeology)SociologyValue (mathematics)Gender studiesMiddle classPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawEconomyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the place of children’s books in parenting strategies in Russian families. It approaches children’s books and their circulation in post-socialist Russia as one of the cultural sites where social distinction and gender are negotiated and articulated. It argues, in particular, that the importance of children’s books in post-Soviet parenting is related to a perceived insecurity of one’s social status and aspirations for a higher, or more secure, social position for themselves and their children. Genealogically, this importance draws on the Soviet-era understanding of books as a universal cultural value equally available to every Soviet citizen, but in this post-Soviet context, this idea is internalized and appropriated by the urban middle class as a means of creating and supporting social distinction.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.657

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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