Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to identify the key factors that contributed to the decision of the Canadian government not to participate in the join forces led by the United States favourable to a military intervention in Iraq. This decision was the Canadian response to various interior pressures and in particular exercised by the Quebec government and the Assemblee nationale du Quebec. The consensus among all groups in Quebec society and the government put the province in the front seat during this international crisis. On the other side, the Canadian government had to cope with a divisive public opinion in the rest of Canada. This analysis supports the « realist » explanation which suggests that the inner circle around the Prime minister play a crucial role in the analysis of public opinion as well in the strategy elaborated by the government. We can observe some convergence between public opinion and the Canadian government. This analysis also supports the arguments put for by the « screening theory » that structural and environmental factors play a key role in decisions by political elites and citizens.« Nous savons que le Quebec est tres pro-americain, tres partisan du libre-echange [...]. Nous savons que ce sentiment puissant contre la guerre est historique, que cela fait partie de la culture quebecoise depuis longtemps. Nous avons donc clairement dit dans nos rapports transmis a Washington que, malgre le sentiment anti-guerre du Quebec, il y persistait un sentiment pro-americain, quâ??il ne fallait pas interpreter cela comme une reaction contre les ???tats-Unis. »1Paul Celluci Ambassadeurdes ???tats-Unis au CanadaLes opinions des citoyens durant des periodes de crises internationales ou nationales constituent des terreaux fertiles pour analyser la relation entre lâ??opinion publique et les decisions gouvernementales. Toutes les crises politiques representent dâ??ailleurs des moments propices qui nous permettent de mieux differencier les attitudes des citoyens et des gouvernants et comprendre comment les elites politiques reagissent face aux reactions de leurs opinions publiques. La reponse des dirigeants politiques, que ce soit en matiere de politique etrangere ou de defense, varie en fonction de lâ??importance des enjeux et de leur visibilite dans les medias2. Car il faut bien noter que les questions de politique etrangere interessent relativement peu les citoyens, ce qui tendrait a faciliter davantage les efforts des leaders politiques pour manipuler lâ??opinion publique3. Les periodes de crises politiques internationales, comme la guerre en Irak de 2003, forcent les dirigeants politiques a etre plus attentifs a lâ??opinion de leurs citoyens et aux elites ou experts dont les medias transmettent, davantage quâ??en toute autre occasion, les commentaires, analyses et interpretations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".