MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177516656 · doi:10.1177/11771801211019097

Indigenous sovereignty in digital territory: a qualitative study on land-based relations with #NativeTwitter

2021· article· en· W3177516656 on OpenAlexafffund
Ashley Caranto Morford, Jeffrey Ansloos

Bibliographic record

VenueAlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCyberspaceIndigenousSovereigntyColonialismThe InternetSociologyThematic analysisConceptual frameworkPolitical scienceMedia studiesQualitative researchSocial scienceLawEcologyPoliticsWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technology scholars have often framed cyberspace as landless. Critical technology and Indigenous new media scholars have critiqued this approach, citing the land-based nature of Internet infrastructure. This study seeks to further develop the conceptual framework of Indigenous land-based relations through qualitative analysis of Indigenous language revitalization networks within Twitter. Using a thematic analysis approach, six key themes emerged: (a) Land-based cyber-pedagogy, (b) Rematriations of land-based relations in digital environments, (c) Digital bridges to homelands and lifeways, (d) Networked cultural navigation, (e) Settler colonialism in cyberspace, and (f) Indigenous digital sovereignty and cyber-justice. Implications for theory and practice in both new media studies and language revitalization are considered, with a focus on elucidating the land-based nature of the Internet, Indigenous people's navigation of colonialism within the Internet, and the meaning of anti-colonial resistance in cyberspace.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.242
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous PeoplesSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207