MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208069178 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v15n1p7

Of Parochial Partisanship and Education: Towards Civic Duty or Polarization?

2021· article· en· W3208069178 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
George Asekere, Ebenezer Teye Amanor-Lartey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsDutyPolarization (electrochemistry)Political scienceSociologyLawPublic relationsPublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explored parochial partisanship among university students amid growing concerns about political polarization in Ghana. The paper used mixed research methods to gather data with the aid of an interview guide and a questionnaire. It argued that university education inculcates in and endows young people with a sense of civic-minded duty to prioritize the collective good of society and subordinate parochial partisan preferences in an analysis of political policies. The novel finding is that university education in Ghana has enlightened many young people to decipher between the facts and the propagandistic view held by political activists because of parochial partisan interest. However, university education was found to be a necessary but not sufficient condition to wipe out parochial partisanship which is the bane behind the growing political polarization in Ghana. The paper recommends continuous seminars on the dangers associated with negative partisanship in all tertiary educational institutions. Further, the winner-takes-all politics should be reviewed.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207