MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214624955 · doi:10.1177/00953997211073742

Privation of Inclusion: An Exploration of the Stealth and the Strategy that Sabotaged Racialized Public Servants’ Career Mobility in British Columbia, Canada

2022· article· en· W4214624955 on OpenAlexaffabout
Farid Asey

Bibliographic record

VenueAdministration & Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Salience (neuroscience)RacismInclusion–exclusion principleSociologyLimitingPolitical scienceGender studiesWork (physics)CriminologyPsychologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper qualitatively examines “privation of inclusion” at work in the lived experiences of racialized participants hired in publicly funded places of employment. Taking the position that the dualistic inclusion-exclusion paradigm fails to capture their lived realities with inclusive exclusions and exclusive inclusions, it presents privative inclusion as a third space, between inclusion and exclusion, for a more robust framework in understanding how racialized bodies were marked and targeted for differential treatment. The paper then outlines and discusses findings as key indicators of privative mechanisms that had undermined life chances by limiting career mobility of racialized participants of this study. It concludes by emphasizing the need for additional research in this area given the salience of racism at work as well as the demographic changes that Canada is currently experiencing.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0520.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdministration & SocietySame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207