MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407403194 · doi:10.14507/er.v32.3983

Review of Networks of Trust: The Social Costs of College and What We Can Do About Them, by A. S. Laden

2025· article· en· W4407403194 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Shaker

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial trustInternet privacyPsychologyBusinessPublic relationsSocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceSocial scienceSocial capital

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It's burnt.""What?" "So are the Chekhov books you lent me.Denny found out I was on the pill, he's burnt all me books.""Oh, Christ.I'm sorry, I'll get you some more books.""Oh, sod the books.I wasn't referring to the books.Why can't he just let me get on with me learning?You'd think I was having an affair, the way he behaves.""Perhaps you are having an affair.""Go 'way, I'm not!What time have I got for an affair?Jesus, I'm busy enough finding meself, let alone finding anyone else.I'm beginning to find me.It's great.It is, you know, Frank.It might sound selfish but all I want for now is what I'm finding inside me." ~From the screenplay "Educating Rita" (Gilbert, 1983)Rita's crisis stems from the loss of friends, family, and community in the name of education-or is it indoctrination?The review of Networks of Trust that follows can be seen as five essays on the alienating effects of school and college education with thoughts on how to mitigate these consequences.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.401 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducation ReviewSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207