MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4284885288 · doi:10.3897/jbgs.e87749

Insights from feminist geography: positionality, knowledge production, and difference

2022· article· en· W4284885288 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Annie Elledge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Bulgarian Geographical Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritical geographyHuman geographyReflexivityKnowledge productionIndigenousHistorical geographyCultural geographySociologyTRACE (psycholinguistics)Time geographyDevelopment geographyGender studiesFeminist philosophySocial scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feminist geographers investigate the messy, power-laden, and embodied relationships humans and non-humans have with their environment. This review examines foundational texts in feminist geography in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom and more recent work that engages with Black geographies, Indigenous geographies, and disability geographies. I discuss three important considerations in feminist geography: knowledge production, the formation of difference, and critical reflexivity. To do this, I trace the historical development of feminist geography as a subdiscipline to identify the numerous ways that feminists intervene within Geography.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.151
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Bulgarian Geographical SocietySame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207