No voice for the Global South – analysing the Annual Convention of the International Studies Association (ISA)
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
The article contributes to the postcolonial and decolonial debate on epistemic inequality in International Relations (IR) research by analysing the global representation of universities at the Annual Convention of the International Studies Association in Toronto in 2019. The results are fourfold. First, the overwhelmingly represented Western countries are mostly located at universities in North America and Europe. Second, universities located in Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) are largely underrepresented compared to their population size and number of universities. Third, even in so- called Global South panels, the representation of scholars from the Global North is much higher than that of academics from the Global South. Fourth, the representation gap also holds true when analysing researcher mobility and individual publication records. The implications of the case study results shed light on the difficulties of analysing epistemic violence without contributing oneself to the prevalent asymmetries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 it