MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Malinowski, Bronislaw

2013· other· en· W4236420339 on OpenAlexaff
J. I. Bakker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Encyclopedia of Cross‐Cultural Psychology · 2013
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Science and Policy Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnographyRhetoricObjectivity (philosophy)HEROAnthropologyFaithArt historyHistorySociologyArtLiteraturePhilosophyEpistemologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bronislaw Malinowski (1884 − 1942) was a well‐known Polish‐British‐American anthropologist who became famous for his first book (1922/1984), Argonauts of the Western Pacific , which discussed the Kula Ring. The Kula Ring is a fascinating topic because it so clearly shows that in pre‐modern, traditional economics many of the so‐called “laws” of neo‐classical economics clearly do not apply in any simple, straightforward manner. The Trobriand Islands, just east of Papua New Guinea, were his object of study. His research in the modernist tradition has been critiqued by postmodernist thinkers who would like to recast the epistemological basis for social anthropology. Malinowski the “fieldworker” and Malinowski the “theoretician” have sometimes been replaced by Malinowski “the anti‐hero” in some of the postmodernist accounts. Publication of Malinowski's Diary (1967) contributed to the controversy. For those who believe that striving for some degree of objectivity in ethnographic monographs is possible, Malinowski still represents a founder of the kind of fieldwork that constitutes the bedrock of solid anthropological work. Much of the rhetoric against Malinowski ignores his path‐breaking innovations. pointed out: “… it is often a great deal easier to criticize one's intellectual heritage than to acknowledge one's inheritance”.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.426 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Encyclopedia of Cross‐Cultural PsychologySame topicSocial Science and Policy ResearchFrench-language works237,207