MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Political Discourse

2018· other· en· W4250590888 on OpenAlexaff
Diane Riskedahl

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Encyclopedia of Anthropology · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyPoliticsDialogicMateriality (auditing)PersuasionAgency (philosophy)Power (physics)SociologyMultimodalityCivil discourseDiscourse analysisLinguisticsAestheticsPolitical scienceSocial scienceLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study of discourse directs our attention to how the words we use are central to both our perception of social reality and to the actual formation of that reality. The anthropological approach to political discourse anchors texts and talk within contexts of use in which control, persuasion, and domination occur. This allows for the study of the dialogic emergence of politics as well the integration of such issues as audience reception and circulation of discourses. Struggles for power are evident at the levels of language structure, patterns of interaction, and broader discursive formations. Recent work attends to agency, multimodality, ideology, political economy, and materiality.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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 score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2100.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.337 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Encyclopedia of AnthropologySame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207