MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090521870 · doi:10.15173/glj.v11i3.4050

Korean Suicide Protest as Anomic Response to Labour Disempowerment

2020· article· en· W3090521870 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Minsun Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Labour Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Industrial and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)Collective actionIndividualismPoliticsState (computer science)Political scienceLabour lawPolitical economySociologyCriminologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article argues that the growth of worker protest suicide in the 2000s in South Korea is relatedto current neo-liberal political-economic conditions in Korea, including: 1) the growing crisis facingincreasingly irregular and part-time workers, and 2) the construction of an anti-labour legal regimegiving Korean workers few legal options for collective engagement in workplace actions. Legalobstacles facing labour activists include both business and state actors increasingly usingcompensation lawsuits and provisional seizure tactics to seize the assets of unions and strikingworkers. As the Korean labour movement finds itself increasingly marginalised by the cripplinganti-labour legal innovations of the last two decades, labour resistance has increasingly manifestedin extreme forms of individualistic protests, such as worker suicide. Though products of anomicdespair, these suicides retain the capacity to inspire collective labour action and to leverage change.KEYWORDS: labour movement; protest suicide; provisional seizure; neo-liberalism; Korea

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Labour JournalSame topicAsian Industrial and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207