MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2993575350

Ideological stance of Justin Trudeau's Speech at The United Nations General Assembly

2019· dissertation· en· W2993575350 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dejan Awaludin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyCritical discourse analysisContext (archaeology)InjusticeInterpretation (philosophy)SociologyIndigenizationLinguisticsEpistemologyPolitical sciencePoliticsLawHistoryPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research investigates ideological stance which was presented by Justin Trudeau in his speech at the United Nation General Assembly. It reveals how ideology and information contained in the speech. Thus, the statement of problems involve: 1. How is social injustice narrated in the speech of Justin Trudeau at the United Nations 2) Where is his position towards the phenomenon. Due to this research is interdiciplinary, some theories are applied in this research. The research concerns with Critical Discourse Analysis. Thus, the main theory is three-dimensional framework coined by Norman Fairclough which consist of three stages; description stage deals with analysis of formal properties of text (in this research transitivity analysis is applied), interpretation stage deals with text as discursive practice (production, distribution, and consumption of text) and intertextuality of how texts are constructed through various of other text, and explanation stage deals with institutional and societal context. Additional theories that support this research involve discourse, discourse analysis, concept of power, and ideology. Therefore, the method of the research is descriptive-qualitative research where the researcher uses words to give the description of the data. The result shows in description stage, Trudeau mostly uses material process to show his efforts to solve Canada’s crisis regarding to human rights abuses that Indigenous Peoples have experience. Furthermore, relational process as second-most used verb is used to show Canada’s identity as multicultural country as a place of diversity. In interpretation stage, Trudeau involve in the process of script making. Then the speech is transformed into various mass media’s topics. In explanation stage, Trudeau as the leader of Canada, occupies himself as the defender of Indigenous Peoples. Therefore, as the leader of Liberal Party of Canada, he touts liberalism in his country as to equality for everyone, fighting against gender-based violent, and fighting for multiculturalism in his country. As the conclusion, it is conclude that Trudeau in one hand blames Canadian government which failed to protect Indigenous community’s rights as well as Indian Act as the source of inequities. Therefore, he occupies himself as the leader of Canada and his Liberal Party of Canada and defends Indigenous Peoples’ rights.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.010
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Russian Policy Studies→French-language works237,207→