Emotions and social conflicts: mobilisations against animal husbandry in Brittany, France
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social conflicts have been largely studied according to their rational aspect, looking at arguments and strategies mobilised by rationally engaged actors. However, land-use conflicts over animal husbandry in Brittany have shown that a pre-reflexive element comes into play, motivating action before justification. Emotions are a ‘forgotten variable’ of individual and collective action that can be fruitfully grasped in a relational approach, as a component of any social relations. In this article, we propose a theoretical framework to understand the role of emotions in social conflicts. The focus is on situations where people engage in conflict rather than avoid it. We base our framework on Dewey’s account of emotions as a ‘disruption in routine’ and rational thinking as an effort to readjust. To fully grasp the dynamics of conflict, we also suggest that the processes of emotional revision, routine, trust and values are essential components of collective action in situations of conflict.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it