MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997468002 · doi:10.3138/jrpc.2017-0050

Prime Time for Prayer: An Analysis of Prayers Offered and Answered in the Reality Series<i>Answered Prayers</i>

2019· article· en· W2997468002 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sharon Lauricella

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion and Popular Culture · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia, Religion, Digital Communication
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrayerPower (physics)Grounded theoryPrime timePsychologySociologySocial psychologyQualitative researchTheologySocial scienceAdvertisingPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Media power couple Roma Downey and Mark Burnett’s 2015 reality program Answered Prayers appeared as a six-episode series on TLC. The program depicts prayer lives through spoken interview-style vignettes and reenactments portraying individuals and families in crisis. This article addresses the ways in which Answered Prayers depicts how people pray, why they do so, and what “answered prayers” look like via reality media. A grounded theoretical analysis (Charmaz 2006) allows for themes and relationships in the data to emerge. Results indicate that this reality program suggests to viewers that prayers are always answerable. A model of relationships between offering prayers and receiving answers is presented, and the objectives of the producers of the program are addressed.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Religion and Popular CultureSame topicMedia, Religion, Digital CommunicationFrench-language works237,207