MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126342760 · doi:10.1177/0020715221988951

The politics of anti-austerity protest: South Korea in 1997–1998 and Greece in 2009–2010

2021· article· en· W3126342760 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sang Kyung Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAusterityPoliticsPolitical scienceStimulus (psychology)Political economyDevelopment economicsEconomicsPsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Why does austerity confront varying degrees of popular resistance? While prior research primarily addresses the economic threat of austerity as the stimulus for anti-austerity protest, a growing volume of studies highlights the roles of external environments in moderating the mobilizing effect of austerity. This study challenges the recent literature on the moderating role of external environments, pointing out that it tends to overlook the distinction between structural and contingent aspects of external environments. I undertake a paired comparison of carefully chosen cases, South Korea in 1997–1998 and Greece in 2009–2010, to examine the moderating roles of the two aspects of external environments—each aspect is characterized through the notion of political opportunity drawing on Rootes’ work. Results reveal that structural and contingent opportunities played distinct roles in promoting (Greece) and hampering (South Korea) the growth of anti-austerity movements, initially triggered by the economic threat of austerity in both countries.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207