Not in any Backyard: An Analysis of Public Frames and Perceptions of the Planned Kemptville Prison.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2020, the province of Ontario announced plans to build a prison on the former grounds of an agricultural school in Kemptville. This announcement shocked many residents, and opposition quickly formed in the community. I studied the community-government relations regarding the planned prison through 18 interviews with local residents and a frame analysis of publicly available texts created by key prison proponents and opponents. These frames were analyzed with the interview data to examine how participants made sense of the prison proposal. I discuss how competing frames about economic gains, NIMBYism, rehabilitation, and inevitability are reflected in residents’ multi-faceted understandings of imprisonment. This thesis contributes to literature on public reactions to planned prisons and efforts to resist them. My research revealed the complexities of how the Kemptville public engaged with pro and anti-prison frames, showing, for example, that public opposition had moved beyond simple NIMBYism, offering openings for abolitionist framing.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".