Disruptive Behavior in the Postdisciplinary Society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Responding to disruptive behavior has become increasingly problematic in current Westernized societies, impacting people’s well-being globally. In the context of the current Special Issue, in this article, we advance the concept of problematic disruptive behavior (PDB) as a suitable “window” to better understand some aspects of the deep interdependence of social participation, citizenship, justice, and well-being. To do so, we also advance the notion of postdisciplinary society to account both for the apparent rise of problematic disruptive experiences, and the increased social conflict within which such experiences get often entangled. More specifically, we argue that formerly morally acceptable responses to problematic disruption, such as punishment and discipline, have lost social legitimacy and, to that extent, they aggravate the problems they were intended to resolve. We provide a genealogical account of the surge of such postdisciplinary order with a focus on the moral transition on ideas of justice, of personal entitlements, and authority. We conclude outlining an alternative way to respond to disruptive behaviors that we anticipate will be both more effective and acceptable in the current postdisciplinary milieu.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".