MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005303544 · doi:10.1111/rec3.12349

Material irreligion: The role of media in atheist studies

2020· article· en· W3005303544 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReligion Compass · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtheismMateriality (auditing)ScholarshipIdentity (music)PsychologySociologySocial psychologyEpistemologyAestheticsPhilosophyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite the material turn in the study of religion and the humanities and social sciences more broadly, many scholars still tend to treat atheism as a purely intellectual or philosophical position. Recent scholarship has begun to seriously examine the emotional, material, and sociopolitical bases of contemporary and historical atheism, but more work remains to be done. In particular, scholars of atheism need to pay close attention to the role of media in the emergence of atheism as a collective self‐identity. Atheism appears particularly vulnerable to a scholarly cognitivist bias that overemphasizes the importance of religious belief or lack thereof. Media studies, by emphasizing the importance of materiality in the fashioning of human subjects, can provide an important corrective to this bias.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.295 · 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