MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900241428 · doi:10.29173/psur48

‘Lock Her Up’: Harassment and Violence Against Women in Alberta Politics

2018· article· en· W2900241428 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Meghan Cardy

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Science Undergraduate Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarassmentPoliticsOpposition (politics)Political scienceIdeologyPolitical economyCriminologyGender studiesLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the ‘Orange Wave’ of the 2015 election in Alberta, women within and outside of the NDP caucus have experienced incredible levels of harassment from both ideological opposition and within their own parties. This harassment occurs towards the government demonstrative of the most success in formal representation women have ever had in Albertan politics. This uptick in the frequency and severity of harassment online, in protest, and in traditional political channels such as party leadership contests lead some to question the role Alberta’s political culture played in it’s occurrence, and the impact such a culture may have in the future. Examined using theory of gendered electoral violence and in the larger context of women’s political leadership in Canada, this paper proposes that a further critical eye should be turned towards this phenomenon rather than including it as a part of the job of doing politics as a woman.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.335 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolitical Science Undergraduate ReviewSame topicGender Politics and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207