MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791068420 · doi:10.1177/0008429817748138

They Couldn’t Get My Soul

2018· article· en· W2791068420 on OpenAlex
Megan Goodwin

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoulPhenomenonSexual abuseHuman sexualityReligious studiesCriminologySociologyGender studiesPsychologyHistorySuicide preventionPoison controlTheologyPhilosophyMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the 1980s and early 1990s, hundreds of women recovered memories of suffering extraordinary and nefarious torments at the hands of loved ones and trusted authority figures—a phenomenon that came to be known as satanic ritual abuse (SRA). In this article, I argue that late twentieth-century satanic ritual abuse discourse helped perpetuate intolerance toward non-Christian religions and foreclose conditions of possibility for benign religious difference in the United States. Psychological diagnoses related to satanic ritual abuse fueled popular anxieties regarding the sexual peril of American minority religions. Perpetuating diagnoses of satanic ritual abuse reinforced popular suspicions that religious minorities are dangerous, particularly when it comes to matters of sexuality.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.350 · 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