MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382787433 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v13n6p514

Representation of Women and Sexuality in Buchi Emecheta’s The Slave Girl and J.M. Coetzee’s Disgrace: A Study

2023· article· en· W4382787433 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
R Siva, M Ramesh

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPostcolonial and Cultural Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlameSilenceGirlWifeVirtueGender studiesSexual desireRepresentation (politics)PsychologyHuman sexualitySociologySocial psychologyLawPolitical sciencePhilosophyDevelopmental psychologyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women have typically had less legal privileges and career opportunities throughout history than men. The most important occupations for women historically have been those of wife and mother, and they have long been seen as being inherently weaker than men. Their existence and rights are assumed by patriarchal society. Women often view silence as a virtue, but with education, the silence is broken.Many cultural traditions in Africa discriminate women. Husbands frequently beat their wives and place the blame for infertility squarely on their shoulders. Even if it is not proven that they are to blame for the marital issues, they still endure those sufferings. Because culture encourages men to marry multiple women, married women are susceptible to being replaced at any time by their husbands.Female characters in African literature typically experience discrimination as an afterthought to male protagonists. Therefore, the purpose of this research paper is to examine how women were treated in the chosen text – Buchi Emecheta’s “The Slave Girl” and J.M. Coetzee’s “Disgrace”.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

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 studies0.0120.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicPostcolonial and Cultural Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207