MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Czy miejscy aktywiści chcą nas zabić? Siły altermodernizacji a konstruowanie konserwatywnej paniki moralnej

2020· article· en· W3088273949 on OpenAlex
Przemysław Pluciński

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

VenuePrzegląd Kulturoznawczy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsAdler
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExaggerationMoral panicElement (criminal law)Stereotype (UML)PanicPoliticsOrder (exchange)SociologyNarrativeJournalismBacklashPolitical scienceSocial psychologyPsychoanalysisLawPhilosophyPsychologyCriminologyMedia studiesEconomicsAnxietyComputer scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article offers an analysis of discursive reactions to the altermodernist patterns developed by urban social movements, present in right-wing and conservative-liberal narratives and journalism. These reactions are clearly backlash. The main thesis of the article is that they meet the conditions of moral panic. Therefore, the following elements of moral panic have been identified: excessive concern for the established order, false representations based on exaggeration and distortion, and the construction of deviation through the negative stereotype of the urban activist. The crucial element of the latter is the construction of the political enemy by means of “communization”.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.254 · 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