Social perceptions about the pattern of use of cachaça among indigenous peoples of the Maxakali ethnic group in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study shows how it was possible to engage in intersubjective dialogue regarding the replacement of models and uses of Maxakali traditional drinks with a distilled beverage introduced through inter-ethnic contact. A comprehensive phenomenological approach was employed to understand and describe the social perceptions about the use of this distillate. Through thematic analysis, symbols and meanings of alcohol use were interpreted through their daily life histories, recorded by 21 leaders in three focus groups. It could amplify ‘subjugated voices’ and embarks on a similar venture of researching their villages' leaders from two disenfranchised groups. The findings highlighted that, with the use of sugar cane liquor, some adaptations have occurred in Maxakali alcohol use, with negative consequences for the communities. They revealed how the native drinks have disappeared and the liquor has been inserted into Maxakali cultural system. Considering the subjectivity of the leaders in the process of data collection and analysis, functions regarding the liquor as a social lubricant, facilitator of shamanic trances, knowledge producer, and factor in the relations of gender and age were identified. Those functions were enmeshed in their symbols and meanings regarding their drinking pattern and contexts, as well as a regulator of expressions of violence and enmity. Additional research and theoretical/methodological alternatives are necessary to investigate the interactions between alcohol use and its ethnic and biopsychosocial synthesis, incorporating the Maxakali way of life into these possibilities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".