MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396781955 · doi:10.1353/tech.2024.a926346

In a New Light: Histories of Women and Energy ed. by Abigail Harrison Moore and R. W. Sandwell (review)

2024· article· en· W4396781955 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology and Culture · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmerican Environmental and Regional History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyGender studiesGerontologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: In a New Light: Histories of Women and Energy ed. by Abigail Harrison Moore and R. W. Sandwell Tijana Rupčić (bio) In a New Light: Histories of Women and Energy Edited by Abigail Harrison Moore and R. W. Sandwell. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2021. Pp. 216. Abigail Harrison Moore and R. W. Sandwell's edited volume, In a New Light, is a recent attempt to approach the enduring gender imbalance in narratives about the history of energy and reclaim it from the embrace of the male-dominated sphere of influence. The authors argue that the absence of women from historical accounts of energy history is mostly due to the overarching foundation in approaching the studies of energy history from a male point of view, as well as the sources that researchers tend to focus on. This volume delves into the significance of women in the historical context of energy, with specific emphasis on decision-making in the usage of new energy sources, ranging from candlelight usage in British households during the nineteenth century to the process of electrifying [End Page 725] rural Scottish homes in the latter half of the twentieth century. Ranging from exploration of the changing social, economic, and gender dynamics of women in various fields—including candle lighting, electrical energy technology implementation, decorating services, and technical expertise—the contributors call attention to women as intermediaries between emerging energy technologies and the domestic sphere. Consequently, the authors of this collection analyze the process of transformation of energy through the lens of educators, designers of interiors, housewives, and other women whose daily routines are centered around the consumption of household energy. The authors seek to extend the discussion and offer new methods. For example, Sorcha O'Brien utilizes oral histories that she and other researchers gathered from elderly women in rural Ireland, specifically those in their seventies and eighties. O'Brien documents the recollections of women who consumed energy, capturing their sentiments of longing for the bread that was traditionally baked over turf fires before the advent of modern stoves. However, these memories also include less pleasant recollections of hand-washing clothes. Furthermore, the authors locate a variety of relevant historical sources and point out varied perspectives on the context, timing, and justification for energy decisions from the female perspective. This volume shows a range of archives, official documents, online resources, print media, and interviews that historians can use to incorporate marginalized perspectives into the narratives of energy history. For example, Karen Sayer brings to the stage the women who acquired, ignited, and cared for the candlelight, thereby emphasizing the changing social, economic, and gender-based dynamics of society. Understanding the significance of women's participation in energy decision-making is not a novel approach. Ruth Schwartz Cowan's book More Work for Mother (1983), which the contributors of In a New Light often quote, was one of the first to emphasize the significance of the relationship between gender and technology. In the studies that ensued, some researchers placed greater importance on particular technologies or energies, such as Marsha Ackermann's Cool Comfort (2002), while others consistently highlighted the significance of women's roles in families and the division of labor, as in June Freeman's Making of the Modern Kitchen (2004). In a New Light highlights the necessity of adopting an interdisciplinary approach that incorporates both gender and energy, while also emphasizing the importance of a comprehensive understanding of all the elements involved in the energy transition. While the present volume mostly maintains the tradition of outlining the involvement of women in energy usage and decision-making inside the household, the contributors also offer new perspectives on households where women were the primary catalysts of transformation. The volume's limitations lie in its exclusive examination of energy-related decisions made by housemakers in western Europe and North America, with a lack of case studies addressing similar decisions in other regions of the world. [End Page 726] In a New Light's case studies successfully demonstrate women's adaptability to the developing realm of industrialized and interconnected energy systems. The book also emphasizes the importance of memory and oral history in understanding events from...

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.509
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.171 · 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