MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2911074775 · doi:10.18174/462784

Looking beyond conflict: the long-term impact of suffering war crimes on recovery in post-conflict northern Uganda

2018· dissertation· en· W2911074775 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Teddy Atim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaDepartment for International DevelopmentWageningen University and ResearchOverseas Development InstituteYork University
KeywordsLivelihoodVulnerability (computing)Armed conflictAgency (philosophy)CriminologyPolitical sciencePoliticsTransitional justiceSociologyGeographySocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis studies the experiences of alleged war crimes during the armed conflict in northern Uganda (Acholi and Lango sub-regions) and the multiple challenges these experiences present to youth attempting to recover in the post-conflict period. The thesis draws on primary quantitative and qualitative data collected in Acholi and Lango sub-regions in northern Uganda between January 2013 and December 2017. The findings show that youth who experienced or witnessed war crimes, especially those who suffered multiple war crimes, find it hard to regain lost education and experience more challenges maintaining good relations with their families and society in the post-conflict period. Similarly, strict gendered patriarchal norms and expectations render it challenging for conflict-affected youth to reintegrate into their families and society, particularly for women survivors of wartime sexual violence and their children born of war. The finding challenges the idea that ‘recovery’ is linear or that the end of conflict ‘normalises’ experiences of war crimes. Additionally, whereas war crimes suffered during conflict do impact livelihoods and recovery of young people, broader social, cultural, economic, and political processes also greatly matter. Lastly, while the conflict heightened individual vulnerability and complicated the recovery process, these factors do not entirely erase young people’s agency. Some young people were able to effectively and positively maneuver even withn the limitations of their circumstances.

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)0.010
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.005
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration, Health and Trauma→French-language works237,207→