MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384497125 · doi:10.29173/crossings124

Persistent Sacrifice: The 'Sacrificial Lamb' Effect, Women Candidates, and Underrepresentation in the 44th Parliament

2023· article· en· W4384497125 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gavriel Kesik-Libin

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentPolitical scienceRepresentation (politics)LawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In August of 2021, Canadian Parliament was dissolved and the 44th federal election was called. Its result was a Parliament that was only marginally more representative of female and gender-diverse candidates than the last. This is in part due to the ‘sacrificial lamb’ effect identified by Melanee Thomas and Marc-Andre Bodet, which highlights the persistence of parties in running women and gender-diverse candidates in unwinnable or ‘swing’ ridings – such that they become ‘sacrifices’ and are destined for failure. Previous research has confirmed the presence of the ‘sacrificial lamb’ effect across several elections. I examine specific incidents of gender-diverse candidates being run in the ‘stronghold’ riding of another party, as well as the slates of candidates in several ‘swing’ and ‘stronghold’ ridings across the country. Further, I consider the likely implications of the ‘sacrificial lamb’ effect and the general underrepresentation of female candidates in the 44th Parliament, as well as the extent to which the ‘sacrificial lamb’ effect may have compromised the freeness and fairness of the 2021 campaign. I conclude that the ‘sacrificial lamb’ effect continued in full force throughout the 2021 campaign, which is likely to have a detrimental impact on the representation of women’s interests, specifically as they pertain to the pressing women’s issues of today.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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 venueCrossings An Undergraduate Arts JournalSame topicGender Politics and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207