MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519989003 · doi:10.1093/socrel/srw035

<i>American Secularism: Cultural Contours of Nonreligious Belief Systems,</i>by Joseph O. Baker and Buster G. Smith

2016· article· en· W2519989003 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Russell Jeung

Bibliographic record

VenueSociology of Religion · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecularismSecularitySecular stateReligious beliefSociologyPopulationPoliticsReligious studiesBelief systemQuarter (Canadian coin)AtheismReligiosityState (computer science)CategorizationGeneral Social SurveySocial scienceSocial psychologyPsychologyEpistemologyEthnologyLawPolitical scienceHistoryPhilosophyDemographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

American Secularism introduces a comprehensive, groundbreaking approach to understanding the rise of secularism in the United States. As stated in the Introduction, the number of Americans who state that that they are nonreligious has increased 3.5 times in the last three decades, and they now make up about one-quarter of our population. The authors attribute this significant change in the American religious landscape to shifts in the political meanings of religion in American culture. Employing rigorous analyses of the General Social Survey from 1972 through 2012 and the Pew Religious Landscape Survey (2007), Baker and Smith first identify three dimensions of secularity: affiliation, belief, and practices. From these dimensions, they categorize the nonreligious into four classes: (1) atheists; (2) agnostics; (3) nonreligious believers; and (4) culturally religious. Those in the third category are often termed ‘spiritual but not religious’ in that they maintain religious beliefs but eschew organized religion. Those in the fourth category are those who retain affiliation but do not share in beliefs and practices. Although the nonreligious may be lumped together as all secular, they each reflect distinct cosmic belief systems that enable them to be studied in the same way as the religious.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.292 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociology of ReligionSame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207