MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402012156 · doi:10.1080/13619462.2024.2387584

‘No status – no census!’ The causes and consequences of the 1971 and 1981 Northern Ireland census boycotts

2024· article· en· W4402012156 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Laurence Cooley

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary British History · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicRomani and Gypsy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsCensusGeographyAmerican Community SurveyDemographic economicsDemographyPolitical sciencePopulationSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite Northern Ireland having been established on the basis of statistics from the 1911 census and the centrality of religious demography to many accounts of its conflict, little has been written about the political history of census-taking there. This paper contributes to addressing this oversight by exploring two related controversies in that history: the 1971 and 1981 census boycotts. Through use of archive materials, it demonstrates how concerns about the privacy of personal information collected by the census against the backdrop of the Troubles, were mixed with broader motivations whereby the census was seen as a symbolic target for protest and boycott in the context of discrimination against Catholics and the republican movement’s campaign for political status for its prisoners, with the 1981 boycott taking place during the hunger strike of that year. Despite a perhaps surprisingly low rate of overall non-response to the census given calls for it to be boycotted, the boycotts did have a significant impact and a legacy that lasted into the 1990s—by which time republicans’ attitude towards the census had changed for the positive.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.897

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.016
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary British HistorySame topicRomani and Gypsy StudiesFrench-language works237,207