MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2512964070

From self-made men to crusading women: The gendered evolution of the American temperance movement in the nineteenth century.

2004· dissertation· en· W2512964070 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Holly. Berkley

Bibliographic record

VenueSHAREOK (University of Oklahoma) · 2004
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchitecture, Design, and Social History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityUniversity of OxfordHarvard UniversityPrinceton UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityYale UniversityBattelle
KeywordsMovement (music)Gender studiesProgressive eraHistoryAncient historyPolitical scienceSociologyArtLawAestheticsPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the nineteenth century, the American temperance movement underwent a visible, gendered shift in its leadership as it seemingly evolved from a male-led movement to one dominated by the women of the WCTU. But this transition was more symbolic than real. The two "icons" of the movement in the nineteenth century---the self-made man and the crusading woman---masked the complexity and diversity of temperance during the entire period with regard to race, class and gender. The self-made man did so as a statement of the exclusivity and authority of white, middle-class manhood. The crusading woman did so as a pragmatic means of building a political coalition. An examination of the existence, creation and function of these icons is important for understanding the evolving meaning and context of temperance and its employment of gender. Through an examination of the self-made man and the crusading woman, temperance becomes a story of how the debate on racial and gendered equality became submerged in service to a corporate, political enterprise and how men's and women's identities and functions were reconfigured in relationship to each other and within this shifting political and cultural landscape.

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 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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.190
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSHAREOK (University of Oklahoma)Same topicArchitecture, Design, and Social HistoryFrench-language works237,207