MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293222441 · doi:10.1177/00207152221118627

Religion as a factor in cultural consumption: Religious denomination and its impact on reading practices and ballet-opera attendance in Europe

2022· article· en· W4293222441 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joaquim Rius-Ulldemolins, Alejandro Pizzi, Raul Paya

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Sociology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Cultural Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEurobarometerExplanatory powerSociologyConsumption (sociology)RedressEuropean unionSocial sciencePolitical scienceEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of social and educational factors has often been used to explain social differences in consumption and cultural practices. Without denying the value of such an approach, this article examines the impact of religious denomination and its influence in shaping cultural practices. Our article argues the need for a macro-social, longue durée [long-term] perspective to shed light on cultural differences and why these linger notwithstanding the market and political convergence found in Europe today. The diverse cultural consumption patterns found in European Union (EU) Member States as evidenced by Eurobarometer surveys are examined through our logistic regression analysis. The findings show the explanatory power of the religion variables used by classical historical sociology. These variables have been largely overlooked by modern studies—a shortcoming this article seeks to redress. We see a link between a country’s historical religion (the religious “factor”) and its cultural consumption.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.376 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative SociologySame topicSocial and Cultural DynamicsFrench-language works237,207