Bibliographic record
Abstract
EAJPC preprints 2020-Edward Said’s dogmas of Orientalism are a succinct summary of western perceptions of the East, which reveal an essentially racist discourse that also speaks to the westerner’s self-perception. While there is a tendency in fiction film to polarize attitudes as either friendly or hostile, for reasons of narrative economy and to enhance dramatic conflict, this article argues that it is possible to measure the behaviour of fictional characters on a continuum describing intercultural sensitivity to assess how these characters appear to respond to the idea of cultural differences, broadly ranging from the most ethnocentric views to more ethnorelative ones. Since the intercultural development continuum (IDC) is structured as five developmental stages, it provides a finer psychological template than Orientalist binaries, offering a more nuanced view of character motivations and attitudes. The IDC scale is ideally suited to narrative analysis as it usefully describes successive stages that characters may exhibit throughout the course of a story depicting intercultural exchanges. The IDC allows the analyst to gauge the degree of conformance of any given film to Said’s aforementioned dogmas, particularly those films that either express an ambivalent attitude or appear superficially more enlightened or accommodating of difference. This model will be illustrated with a number of case studies selected from a filmography focusing on western representations of Singapore in film and television, from 1940 to 2015, including titles such as the Bette Davis plantation melodrama The Letter, the science fiction thriller Hitman: Agent 47 and the Australian period TV series Serangoon Road.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".