MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408165361 · doi:10.22329/gljuh.v10i1.8672

Black Autonomy and White Entitlement

2025· article· en· W4408165361 on OpenAlexaff
Kate Bradley

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œGreat Lakes journal of undergraduate history. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRace, History, and American Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntitlement (fair division)AutonomyWhite (mutation)BusinessPolitical scienceEconomicsLawChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

P.T Barnum put on a performance as an owner of enslaved individuals, white Americans poked at Black Africans behind bars in zoos, and children pulled on the dreadlocks of two kidnapped men: for many Americans, it was the greatest form of entertainment. American “freak shows” were sites of racism, re-enactment of enslavement dynamics, and white entitlement. Black individuals who were enfreaked in nineteenth and early twentieth century American sideshows were forced into performances of white superiority and Black inferiority. These sideshows were not merely entertainment: they were vessels to construct social ideas of white ownership of Black individuals and audiences in post-emancipation America. Figures like Joice Heth, Ota Benga, the Batwa people, and George and Willie Muse reveal that sideshows were utilized to uphold a racialized American identity. This paper will argue that the “freak show” acted as a staged performance of race that enabled white control over Black bodies. Additionally, this paper argues that these mistreatments on the sideshow stage were embodied dimensions of the social construction of racial hierarchy in America.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œGreat Lakes journal of undergraduate history.Same topicRace, History, and American SocietyFrench-language works237,207