MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W286026967 · doi:10.3138/cjh.39.3.489

Creating an Image of Science: Persuasion and Iconography in A. Cressy Morrison’s <i>Man in a Chemical World</i>

2004· article· en· W286026967 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Andrew Ede

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of History · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicScience Education and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconographyIconContext (archaeology)PersuasionArt historyWhite (mutation)Media studiesArtSociologyHistoryPhilosophyChemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The image of modern science and the modern scientist was the result of complex interactions among scientists, media sources, and the public. In 1937 chemists were the largest and most powerful group of scientists in the United States, but they had a poor public image because of chemical warfare. Morrison’s book was part of a larger effort to improve and Americanize the image of chemists. The article explores the place of Morrison’s book in the context of the period and examines the images, replete with religious overtones, that helped to create the icon of the scientist as the “man in the white lab coat.”

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.030
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.321 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HistorySame topicScience Education and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207