MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2598123923 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.43.4.495

Neo-Polygamous Activity among the Bedouin of the Negev, Israel: Dysfunction, Adaptation—Or Both?

2012· article· en· W2598123923 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Steven C. Dinero

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolygynyIndependence (probability theory)NegotiationMiddle EastDesert (philosophy)Political scienceEthnic groupState (computer science)GeographyEconomic growthPopulationDevelopment economicsGender studiesEthnologySociologyAncient historyHistoryLawDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polygynous marriage among the bedouin of the Negev Desert, Israel, has gone through a number of phases over the past century. While historically, this practice was relatively rare, limited to wealthier sheikhs and tribal leaders, it has increased since Israeli independence (1948) as economic opportunity and social pressures have fostered its expansion. Two key historic changes in the region are seen to have played a role in the growth of polygyny: the establishment of a forced bedouin sedentarization initiative beginning in 1965, and the Israeli conquest of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967. These developments, along with the signing of a peace treaty with Jordan in 1994, opened opportunities for polygynous relationships with women from outside the Negev, as well. This paper documents the development of a more recent practice in which bedouin men are now seeking co-wives from outside of the Middle East altogether. This practice, I contend, contradicts State interests, and the desires to manage and “modernize” this community as originally designed by the resettlement initiative. Rather, such “neopolygynous” behavior well exemplifies bedouin communal efforts to negotiate their newly developing post-nomadic–and possibly, postbedouin–identities within an ever-expanding “Third Space.”

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207