MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799782801 · doi:10.1111/socf.12439

Exotic Place, White Space: Racialized Volunteer Spaces in Honduras

2018· article· en· W2799782801 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew Jerome Schneider

Bibliographic record

VenueSociological Forum · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTourism, Volunteerism, and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite (mutation)SociologyGender studiesContext (archaeology)Ethnic groupRacismAnthropologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In every year between 2004 and 2012, more than 800,000 Americans reported volunteering internationally (Lough ). These volunteers are overwhelmingly white (McBride and Lough ) and entering a largely nonwhite and developing world. This study starts by questioning how racial status informs volunteer/volunteer tourist interactions, both with locals and with other volunteers, in a global context. In‐depth interviews with 23 missionaries, teachers, and volunteers from the United States and Canada reveal that (1) international volunteering is largely motivated by romantic and exotic understandings of the Global South and (2) in spite of a stated interest in cultural immersion, participants’ notions of their whiteness guided their perceptions of Hondurans and their actions as they sought out and retreated to white spaces protected from Honduran influence. These findings further the work of those who have argued first world travelers have homogenized spaces on reserve, by demonstrating that whiteness can be the basis for the construction and maintenance of protected spaces in predominantly nonwhite countries.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociological ForumSame topicTourism, Volunteerism, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207