How the Canadian academic literature and Canadian newspapers discuss “honour killing”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Literature revealed limited empirical studies on honour killing in Canada. The recent cases drew attention from the media, and the public but less from the academic. Discussion on this issue revolved around immigration, multiculturalism, and violence against immigrant women. Also, it is a manifestation of patriarchy common in most societies, and a form of violence against women not exclusive to one culture but deeply rooted in culture and religion. It is not always the sexual behaviour of the victim that define the 'family honour ‘. Murder, sometimes, is a result of women not following the social rules or the gender norms in the family and the men act to preserve their reputation. To understand honour killing, we need to consider the multiple ources of oppression and think of their intersections and how they affect each other and are intertwined. Keywords: honour, honour killing, Newspapers, violence against immigrant women, culture, Islam, Muslim
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 | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.027 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".