MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946502236 · doi:10.1093/sf/soz059

Shame: A Brief History

2019· article· en· W2946502236 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Clark

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Forces · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotions and Moral Behavior
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShameDignityOpposition (politics)ModernityIndividualismValue (mathematics)SociologyEnvironmental ethicsLawHistoryCriminologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this stimulating book Peter Stearns provides a short examination of the history of shame, primarily in Western Europe and the United States, but in some other regions as well, including Ancient civilizations and Asia. His main purpose is to contribute to the existing literature on shame by presenting an historical account that will demonstrate how shaming has changed—but equally how it has persisted and what new forms it has taken. He contends that an historical analysis calls into question the common distinction we make between shame-based and guilt-based societies, and the notion that any transformation that has taken place is simply one of the outcomes of “modernity.” He holds that we need to examine carefully a variety of cultural changes if we want to understand the history of shame. He devotes the most space to comparing agricultural societies with industrial societies, but he also gives some consideration to pre-agricultural societies. He traces how shaming has declined in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, focussing primarily on its decline in the United States. In broad terms he believes that the major source of the decline was a cultural shift toward a greater value being placed on individualism and individual dignity. As a result, considerable opposition to shaming developed, especially to the way in which it was being used to punish children and those convicted of crimes, and more recently to belittle the obese and the physically or mentally challenged. These campaigns were embedded in larger reform movements that emerged in different periods.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0170.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.285 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial ForcesSame topicEmotions and Moral BehaviorFrench-language works237,207