MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899795505 · doi:10.29173/psur59

The Silent Forces of Agency: War as Experience and Girls in Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front

2016· article· en· W2899795505 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Science Undergraduate Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSierra leoneAgency (philosophy)GirlPolitical violencePoliticsFront (military)Gender studiesNarrativeUnited frontPolitical scienceCriminologySociologyPsychologyLawEngineeringDevelopmental psychologyEthnologyArtSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper looks at young female soldiers in Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front (RUF) in order to study Christine Sylvester’s concept of war as experience. The common narratives of females who engage in political violence often detail their status as either victims or perpetrators. These frames essentialize women’s experiences of conflict, violence, and politics. Applying the idea of war as experience, the girl soldiers of the RUF can be understood as both victims and perpetrators of violence during times of conflict. This paper identifies how experiences of war can be perceived through the lens of physical experience, emotions of fear and self-security, and the further, ongoing implications of victimization. The RUF case helps explain how one can begin to understand why a girl would engage in violent acts and not just be a powerless victim. Through analyzing interviews conducted by Myriam Denov, it is discovered that victimization can be an opportunity for agency to some degree. There are significant consequences for essentializing women as victims since post-conflict programs often exclude women because they are not seen as ex-soldiers or ex-combatants.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.353
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 venuePolitical Science Undergraduate ReviewSame topicGender, Security, and ConflictFrench-language works237,207