Analyzing the Civil Rights Movement: The Significance of Nonviolent Protest, International Influences, the Media, and Pre-existing Organizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay is an analysis of the success of the mid-20th century civil rights movement in the United States. The civil rights movement was a seminal event in American history and resulted in several legislative victories, including the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. After a brief overview of segregation and Jim Crow laws in the southern U.S., I will argue that the success of the civil rights movement can be attributed to a combination of factors. One of these factors was the effective strategy of nonviolent protests, in which the American public witnessed the contrasting actions of peaceful protestors and violent local authorities. In addition, political opportunities also played a role in the movement’s success, as during the Cold War the U.S. federal government became increasingly concerned about their international image. Other reasons for the movement’s success include an increased access to television among the American public, and pre-existing black institutions and organizations. The civil rights movement left an important legacy and ensuing social movements have utilized similar framing techniques and strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".