MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924586269 · doi:10.1093/jdh/epz013

Design Nationalism, Technological Pragmatism and the Performance of Canadian-ness: The Case of the Contempra Telephone

2019· article· en· W2924586269 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jan Hadlaw

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Design History · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCrafts, Textile, and Design
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNationalismIdeologySymbol (formal)PragmatismCentennialIdentity (music)IconDesign historyMedia studiesSociologyHistoryEngineeringPolitical scienceAestheticsLawArtComputer scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Contempra is widely considered to be the first telephone designed and manufactured in Canada. Designed in 1967, Canada’s centennial year, it was a conspicuous departure from prevailing conventions of North American telephone styling in both its conception and design. It was designated as an icon of Canadian modern design and became a symbol of Canada’s identity as a modern nation at home and abroad. Its popularity in domestic and international markets set the stage for the transformation of its developer, Northern Electric, into a global telecommunication leader and Canada’s most valuable corporation, eventually renamed Nortel Networks. The history of the Contempra’s design and development offers an opportunity to consider how designed technological artefacts take on cultural and ideological meaning. Most accounts celebrate the Contempra as a distinctly Canadian design story, but do not elaborate on or question its ‘Canadian-ness’, and they are silent on the circumstances and events that culminated in the telephone’s development. This article examines the historical events, ideological discourses, human relationships, design values and material constraints that set the stage for what can be best described as the Contempra telephone’s performance of modern Canadian nationalism.

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0510.070
Scholarly communication0.0120.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.153 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Design HistorySame topicCrafts, Textile, and DesignFrench-language works237,207