MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255445214 · doi:10.22215/rera.v5i1.203

Between Economic Utility and Regional Attachment: The EMU and Eastern Enlargement in the Spanish Eye

2009· article· en· W4255445214 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Susanna Kislenko

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European and Russian Affairs · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElectoral Systems and Political Participation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResizingPublic opinionContext (archaeology)European unionArgument (complex analysis)Ordinary least squaresPoliticsPolitical scienceOrder (exchange)Positive economicsEconomicsLawGeographyInternational economicsEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses Spain as the case study in furthering understanding of the forces that influence public opinion, specifically as they exist within the contemporary European context. To evaluate this, the focus is on two primary issues: the European Monetary Union (EMU) and the Eastern Enlargement. In order to explore the relationship between opinions towards EU membership, the Euro and support for enlargement, ordinary least squares (OLS) and logistic multivariate regression methods are used to model public opinion development. The argument put forth in this paper is that the formation of public opinion is influenced by both regional dynamics and utilitarian economic considerations. Within this framework, the concept of political symbolism is explored in uncovering the influence of cognitive mobilization, group attachment and cost-benefit factors as they relate to Spanish opinion on widening and deepening of the European Union.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European and Russian AffairsSame topicElectoral Systems and Political ParticipationFrench-language works237,207