MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738672343 · doi:10.26417/ejser.v8i1.p90-103

Negotiating Boundaries Between Gender and Social Identities in the Principality of Samos: The Case of Divorces (1902–1911)

2016· article· en· W2738672343 on OpenAlexaff
Vasilios Gialamas, Sofia Iliadou-Tachou, Alexia Orfanou

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationGender studiesIdentity (music)Context (archaeology)SociologyGovernment (linguistics)Social identity theoryPsychologySocial psychologySocial groupHistorySocial scienceLinguisticsAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on divorces in the Principality of Samos, which existed from 1834 to 1912. The process of divorce is described according to the laws of the rincipality, and divorces are examined among those published in the Newspaper of the Government of the Principality of Samos from the last decade of the Principality from 1902 to 1911. Issues linked to divorce are investigated, like the differences between husbands and wives regarding the initiation and reasons for requesting a divorce. These differences are integrated in the specific social context of the Principality, and the qualitative characteristics are determined in regard to the gender ratio of women and men that is articulated by the invocation of divorce. The aim is to determine the boundaries of social identities of gender with focus on the prevailing perceptions of the social roles of men and women. Gender is used as a social and cultural construction. It is argued that the social gender identity is formed through a process of “performativity”, that is, through adaptation to the dominant social ideals.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0290.026
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Social Sciences Education and ResearchSame topicHistorical Gender and Feminism StudiesFrench-language works237,207