MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2927540772 · doi:10.60082/0829-3929.1325

Beyond the Figure of the Problem Gambler: Locating Race and Sovereignty Struggles in Everyday Cultural Spaces of Gambling

2018· article· en· W2927540772 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Fiona Nicoll

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Law and Social Policy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernmentalitySovereigntyBiopowerSociologyEntitlement (fair division)IndigenousNeoliberalism (international relations)PoliticsScholarshipGender studiesPolitical economyCriminologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As gambling has become a ubiquitous feature of many neoliberal capitalist societies, the problem gambler has become a familiar cultural figure, invoked in regulation, popular culture and everyday life. This article brings critical research on governmentality together with cultural studies and critical Indigenous scholarship on whiteness, race and sovereignty to understand the racial biopolitics of gambling beyond the individual subject of problem gambling. I argue that, for settler-colonial states, gambling plays a role in maintaining tropes of cultural representation and securing legal and political power within an overarching system of white racial entitlement. An investigation of cultural spaces and products of gambling in Australia, together with close readings of Indigenous creative works, ties the figure of the problem gambler to broader processes of what Goldberg calls ‘racial neoliberalism’. I show how this figure becomes a metonym for dysfunctional consumption, is harnessed to racially targeted welfare reforms, and used to undermine the rights of Indigenous people, both as gamblers and as sovereign political and legal subjects.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Law and Social PolicySame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207