MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956006359 · doi:10.1111/cag.12543

Territoire et actions collectives atikamekw nehirowisiwok dans l'espace médiatique québécois: légitimité politique ou persistance d'une vision coloniale?

2019· article· en· W2956006359 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Raphaël Pelletier, Stéphane Guimont Marceau

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegitimacyIndigenousColonialismPoliticsSociologyNewspaperPolitical sciencePublic spaceCohabitationGender studiesEthnologyHumanitiesMedia studiesAnthropologyLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reception by the media of Indigenous peoples' political actions raises the issues of the discourses and representations at work in the public space. This paper examines how the Atikamekw Nehirowisiw Nation, their territorialities and political actions are represented by French‐speaking written media in Quebec. What are the discourses mobilized to apprehend the issues related to their land claims and contestation? By mobilizing a corpus of newspapers' articles published between 2000 and 2015, this study underlines the coexistence of opposed discourses. On the one hand, a colonial conception remains, reinterpreting the legal and historical legitimacy of the Atikamekw occupation and claims on the territory. On the other hand, the presence and reproduction, particularly through the words of Indigenous leaders, of an accommodating discourse towards Atikamekw's political actions cannot be ignored. The cohabitation between these two discourses highlights different sets of representations, emphasizing the ongoing colonial imaginaries in Quebec .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.011
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207