MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308051495 · doi:10.1177/00027642221132176

Disintegration in the Age of COVID-19: Biological Contamination, Social Danger, and the Search for Solidarity

2022· article· en· W4308051495 on OpenAlexaff
Seth Abrutyn

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Behavioral Scientist · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolidarityFace (sociological concept)SociologyEveryday lifeEnvironmental ethicsIsolation (microbiology)PolitySocial distancePublic relationsSocial psychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CriminologyPolitical sciencePoliticsPsychologySocial scienceDiseaseLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Like any disaster, COVID-19 laid waste to infrastructure and the ability for a community to do community. But, unlike a tornado or nuclear meltdown, COVID-19 laid waste to social infrastructure in unique ways that only a disease can do. On the one hand, a pandemic brings biological dangers that, in turn, make all individuals—loved ones, too—into potential threats of biological contamination. On the other hand, the efforts to contain disease present social dangers, as isolation and distancing threatens mundane and spectacular ritualized encounters and mask-wearing heighten our awareness of the biological risk. By exploring the link between disasters and disease, this paper leverages the lens of contamination, beginning first with the barriers it presents to making and remaking the self in everyday life. Constraints on ritualized encounters, both in terms of delimiting face-to-face interaction and in determining that some spaces have contaminative risks, reduces collective life to imagined communities or shifts to digitally mediated spaces. The former intensifies the sense of anomie people feel as their social world appears as though it were disintegrating while the latter presents severe neurobiological challenges to reproducing what face-to-face interaction habitually generates. Finally, these micro/meso-level processes are contextualized by considering how institutions, particularly polity but also science, manage collective risk and how their efficacy may either contribute to the erosion of solidarity or provide a sense of support in the face of anomic terror. Using the US to illustrate these processes, we are able to show how an inefficacious state response weakens the already tenuous connective tissue that holds a diffuse and diverse population together, while also exposing and intensifying existing political, economic, and cultural fissures, thereby further eroding existing solidarity and the capacity to rebuild post-pandemic cohesion.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Behavioral ScientistSame topicPsychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentFrench-language works237,207