MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404841599 · doi:10.22215/cjers.v17i1.5059

Misreading Russian Studies

2024· article· en· W4404841599 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Paul Goode

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of European and Russian Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Conflict and Governance
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

introspective essay "Misreading Russia" makes two core claims: (a) that understanding Russia's history is crucial to understanding Russia today and (b) that failing to appreciate Russia's history explains the West's perpetually misguided policy towards Russia since the 1990s, culminating in the war Russia is currently waging on Ukraine.The first claim could be formulated as a general stance on the importance of historical and area knowledge for policymakers-a claim that I suspect few would find objectionable despite Sarty's admitted historical determinism.However, the implications of such a stance do not necessarily lead to the second claim, which I argue is factually detached from debates within the academic study of Russia as well as recent Russian history and politics. The Tradition of "Getting Russia Wrong"Sarty's article fits within the literary genre of "getting Russia wrong": every few years, a debate arises in Western capitals over policy towards Russia in which academics and policy-makers lament their failure to appreciate the true drivers of Russian policy.As a result of this failure to attend to Russia's history, culture, and regional specificities, Western analyses and policy are claimed to have produced pathological outcomes that repeatedly drive Russia away from democratization and into renewed conflict with the West.At times, this failure is ascribed to the West's ideological blinders-this was especially the case during the Cold War, though it also emerges in the claim that the West imposed market reforms on Russia-or otherwise to the West's inability to understand different peoples.Both of these implications are present in Sarty's essay, particularly as concerns the destructive path of Russia's economic "shock therapy" and privatization and the claim of the West's ethnocentrism (Sarty 2024, 129-33).For example, the work for which this genre is named, Patrick Cockburn's Getting Russia Wrong (1989), argued at the tail end of the Cold War that Gorbachev's reforms were for real-a seemingly uncontroversial point in hindsight, but one which took aim at conservative voices in the West who argued that Gorbachev's glasnost and perestroika were nothing more than a strategic pause in the Cold War between the USSR and the West.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.267 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of European and Russian StudiesSame topicPolitical Conflict and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207