Forced Identity Performances, Self‐Identification, the Material, and Ballotee Bevin Boys in WWII UK 1943‐1948: ‘An Experience I Would Not Have Had, or Chosen’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This manuscript examines the relationship between forced, or required, identity performances, self‐identification, and the material. It tests core premises of identity formation within the performativity literature against the lived experiences of ‘Ballotee Bevin Boys’ ‐ coal mining conscripts managed under the UK's WWII National Registration and Ministry of Labour and National Service program. Data were drawn from fifty‐eight personal accounts of Ballotee Bevin Boys and analyzed to identify core themes around identity and performance by means of a narrative analysis. Multiple regression analyses then found that the quantity of i) narrative statements of self‐identification as a Bevin Boy, and ii) narrative statements of the material, could be predicted based on the prevalence of narratives of institutionally forced performances, and individual performances of resistance. These results support the claim that performances required of Ballotee Bevin Boys did sediment into their understandings of self, regardless of their individual intention or desire to be a Bevin Boy – even in cases of active resistance against this externally applied category. These findings support a theorization of identity formation and the material which decenters the role of the intention of the performing individual, instead, placing greater emphasis on institutional categories and their enforcement.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".