MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2506066402 · doi:10.1017/s0143045900002854

Women in the Irish Protestant Foreign Missions c. 1873-1914: Representations and Motivations

2000· article· en· W2506066402 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Myrtle Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Church History Subsidia · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtestantismIrishContext (archaeology)Gender studiesChinaWork (physics)Relation (database)SociologyNorthern irelandPolitical scienceHistoryEthnologyLawEngineeringArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of women’s contribution to foreign missionary work has now been well established, with a range of studies, particularly from Canada, America, and Britain, exploring the topic from both religious and feminist perspectives. The role of Irishwomen, however, has neither been researched in any depth nor recorded outside denominational histories in which they are discussed, if at all, only marginally, and only in relation to their supportive contribution to the wider mission of the Church. The motivations, aspirations, experiences, and achievements of the hundreds of women who left Ireland to do God’s work in India, China, Africa, or Egypt are yet to be explored. My intention in this paper is to discuss their work and the ways in which they have been represented in the context of socio-economic developments in late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Ireland, to determine how the interaction of class, gender, and religion helped shape their missionary endeavours.

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)0.002
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 score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Church History SubsidiaSame topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207