Moulding Bodies and Identities in the Outdoors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the early twentieth century, as Guiding and Scouting spread throughout the world, their official publications repeatedly emphasized the supposedly universal appeal of outdoor pursuits, and Guide magazines often featured articles about camping in different national and colonial settings.Articles published in the Guider and the Council Fire, for instance, included "Hints for Camping in the Tropics," "English and American Camping," "Happy Camping in Canada," and "A Hike in Hyderabad, India." 1 As with their treatment of domesticity and citizenship, these Guide texts used camping and woodcraft to stress similarities among the movement's far-flung members, but in ways that often emphasized class-and race-based categories of difference.Camping and woodcraft, which occupied a central place in the mythology of Guiding and Scouting, were the products of a particular set of circumstances in late nineteenth-and early twentieth-century North America and western Europe as middle-class adults, concerned about the physical and moral effects of urban life, sought beauty, authenticity, and a restorative escape through antimodernism and wilderness tourism. 2 By the interwar years, these concerns -and their resulting emphases on the physical, mental, and spiritual benefits of rural retreats -had become an accepted part of Western industrialized mass culture.The decline of child labour, the rise of compulsory education, and the advice of a new class of experts on family relationships and the nature of childhood worked together to popularize the idea that children in particular would benefit from studying nature and learning how to live in the "wilderness."
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".