MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390880514 · doi:10.1080/09574042.2023.2278266

‘Activism for Introverts’: Sensitivity Reading and the Discourse of Emotional Labour

2023· article· en· W4390880514 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sarah Brouillette

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen a Cultural Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaCarleton University
KeywordsWorkforceReading (process)Competition (biology)Emotional laborWork (physics)Sensitivity (control systems)PsychologySocial psychologySociologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article considers sensitivity readers—not as part of a woke mob controlling creative writers, but instead as a largely hidden, contingent, underpaid workforce. Based on interviews with sensitivity readers, it describes their understanding of their work as emotional labour that is badly compensated but rewarding in immaterial ways. It situates their practices within a broader economy of competition for dwindling resources, which encourages people to turn experiences and identities into monetizable assets.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.330 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen a Cultural ReviewSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207