MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2489979287 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n7p29

The Impact of Globalization on Development of Civil Society in Iran with an Emphasis on Political Parties & the Press

2016· article· en· W2489979287 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Arash Sadeghizeidi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationPhenomenonPoliticsCivil societyPolitical sciencePolitical economyDevelopment economicsSociologySocial scienceLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globalization as an emerging and pervasive phenomenon has had a significant impact on various aspects of human life. Development and influence of this phenomenon have been accelerated as a result of the Soviet Union’s collapse, the spread of neo-liberal economics and communications, and information revolution since 1980s. Therefore, this research aims at analyzing the effect of globalization on two important institutions of civil society. Another purpose of the recent research is answering a question regarding globalization as a new and inclusive phenomenon. This question can be considered as “How globalization affects the development of Iran’s civil society especially the press and political parties?” This question has been formed because previous studies indicated that globalization has led to the development of political parties and the press in Iran as a result of political culture development. To substantiate this question, dimensions and the process of its impacts in Iran have been studied in this research. Also, the impact of globalization on political culture, parties, and the press has been evaluated in this research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle EastFrench-language works237,207