Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ruth Benedict was a pioneer of cultural anthropology and one of the most prominent members of the Culture and Personality school that operated in anthropology during the first half of the twentieth century. In her classic work Patterns of Culture , she articulated the connection between anthropology and psychology by promoting the idea that culture could be thought of as a set of personality traits “writ large”: “A culture, like an individual, is a more or less consistent pattern of thought and action”. She stressed the mutual reinforcement of individuals and their cultures. Furthermore, she was a strong proponent of cultural relativism, the idea that each culture should be understood on its own terms and should not be judged on the basis of norms developed in other cultures. In Patterns of Culture , she demonstrated her approach by constructing case studies of three different tribes – the Zuñi of New Mexico, the Dobu of New Guinea, and the Kwakiutl of Vancouver Island – proposing that each was characterized by a particular “personality” or cultural pattern. Further, she argued that these patterns were environmentally, not biologically transmitted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.008 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".