MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770985196 · doi:10.21810/strm.v7i1.119

Paradigms of the Religious Network Society

2015· article· en· W2770985196 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueStream Interdisciplinary Journal of Communication · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia, Religion, Digital Communication
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNetwork societyWorshipChristianitySociologyInformation societyReligious organizationContemporary societySpiritualityMedia studiesReligious studiesLawPolitical scienceSocial sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Beginning in the early 1970’s with the invention of the microprocessor, mass use of information technologies worldwide coincided with the appearance of a nodally-linked network of digital interconnectivity, or ‘network society’ (Castells, 1996). The network society’s exponential growth correlates with a rise in use of digital networking media by various sects and denominations of the Christian religion. Today, growing numbers of Christian organizations integrate digital media into both their approach to worship and the dissemination of the Holy Scriptures. This paper argues that the use of digital media by these organizations is indicative of the creation of a “religious network society” exhibiting identical structural paradigms to Castells’ (1996) network society. By virtue of the media deployed within it, the ‘religious network society’ fosters a mass culture of digital participation characterized by a rapid fragmentation of religious messaging and an over-sharing of personal religious beliefs. However, the religious network society also erodes Christianity’s hierarchical structures of authority (Turner, 2007). It is argued that these structures are being replaced with a banal form of religion emphasizing spirituality and individual self-expression at the expense of tradition (Campbell, 2012; Hjarvard, 2013). Moreover, purpose alterations to Christianity’s authority structures and approach to worship are indicative of a much larger shift in the religion, in which rising digital media use may in fact imply a decline in Christianity’s societal influence.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.360

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.244 · 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