The Greek crisis as a “morality tale”? An empirical assessment
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
Credit and debt are more than just material exchanges within a market economy, they are also social constructs embedded in moral judgments about the character of the agents involved. During the recent European Sovereign Bond crisis, some commentators noted how a similarly loaded moral media discourse juxtaposed “virtuous” Northern European countries on the one side, and “spendthrift, lazy” Southern European ones on the other side. In this article, I provide a quantitative large-N empirical assessment of this phenomenon. I employ a dictionary-based approach inspired by research in social psychology to measure moral content. Upon analyzing more than 14,000 articles published in the Anglo-American and German financial press between 2004 and 2019, I show the extent to which Greece was described in negative moral language. After the initial “shock” in the fall of 2009, the average moral tone turns negative, and more so in the German financial press relative to its Anglo-American counterpart. Moreover, by most measures, it never completely reverts to pre-crisis levels, thus suggesting how “sticky” economic narratives can become. Against the original expectations, though, there is no evidence that the financial press framed the last and most acute phase of the Greek crisis in 2015 in increasingly moral terms.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
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