MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381233473 · doi:10.46692/9781447362784.003

Thinking/acting with migrants under neoliberalism: “It’s horrible to perceive solidarity as merely absorbing the sorrow of one side”

2022· other· en· W4381233473 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cihan Erdal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Refugees, and Integration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolidaritySorrowNeoliberalism (international relations)SociologyPolitical sciencePolitical economySocial psychologyPsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Let me start by sharing the ‘must-be-told’ side of this research story for the chapter you are about to read. I was detained and arrested on 25 September 2020, in Istanbul where I came to do my doctorate field research including the interviews I was hoping to conduct for this chapter. Linked to a lawsuit related to the ‘Kobani protests’ seven years ago in Turkey, I was being held in an f-type high-security prison as a political hostage in what can only be described as a Kafkaesque absurdity. The kind editors of this book have been extremely encouraging and supportive so that my chapter can still be included. Between December 2020 and March 2021, my former master's supervisor Associate Professor Derya Fırat identified potential participants through our connections with activists working in the field and academics who could act as ‘gatekeepers’. She recruited five currently engaged activists from the anti-capitalist and migrant rights struggle. Beforehand, I prepared interview questions and shared the detailed intention of the research with Professor Fırat. We then exchanged letters regularly to advance the fieldwork. Professor Fırat, bringing her own expertise and integrating additional questions to deepen the interviews, conducted these semi-structured interviews via Zoom. She played a crucial role in this research. With the participants’ approval, interview recordings were transcribed by my two close friends Zilan Kaki and Levent Soy. The organisation of this unusual process could not have been possible without my life partner Ömer Ongun. The articles and books I required were provided to me by Professor Fırat, my doctoral supervisor Professor Jacqueline Kennelly, Ömer, my lawyers and other visitors who came to see me in the prison. I believe I am not exaggerating when I say the process of writing this chapter behind bars has turned into a ‘coalitional dynamism’ in itself. What I am calling a coalitional dynamism implies more than a courteous act of solidarity shown within my situation. The people, my professors from Canada and Turkey, my life partner, friends, lawyers and other visitors, who had never gathered before to act together or even met each other, formed a community not only to free me but also secure me from the ‘extreme loneliness’ (Arendt, 1994) of an f-type prison, encouraging me to keep thinking, writing and hoping behind bars.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.027
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMigration, Refugees, and IntegrationFrench-language works237,207