New scholarship in religion and United States empire
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The last few decades have seen an immense expansion in the range of topics included in the field of American religion. The methodologies and overarching narratives of the field have, however, remained more static. Despite the inclusion of racialized minorities, women, and non‐Christians in American religious history, the field has still tended to endorse a liberal integrationist narrative that minimizes the distinct positions of these and other groups in American religious life. New research conducted under the rubric of “religion and U.S. empire” offers one possible way forward for the field by reorienting narratives about American religion toward the study of how colonial systems produce terms such as religion, freedom, and pluralism. This new approach not only foregrounds the stories of colonized peoples but also allows their experiences to reframe how we narrate American religious history. This article discusses the background of the study of empire in U.S. history and religious studies, provides an overview of the main theoretical interventions of works in religion and U.S. empire, and concludes with a discussion of possible future directions for research in this field.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it