Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les populismes peuvent-ils avoir des affinités électives avec le christianisme ? On peut le penser mais les façons d’articuler populisme et religions varient probablement beaucoup selon les pays et zones géographiques. Après avoir repéré les traits fondamentaux du populisme et formulé des hypothèses sur les liens potentiels entre populisme et christianisme, l’article essaye de les opérationnaliser à l’aide de l’enquête European Values Study de 2017-2020. Plusieurs échelles d’attitudes censées mesurer les éléments centraux du populisme sont construites et leurs liens avec la religiosité étudiés. Dans les religions chrétiennes, le protestantisme semble le moins sujet au populisme, sauf dans les courants évangéliques. L’influence directe de la religiosité sur le populisme semble s’expliquer par le fréquent nationalisme des milieux religieux. Il y a aussi un effet indirect des religions lié à l’histoire longue : les religions ont formaté les valeurs nationales au fil des siècles, ce qui explique certaines différences entre cutures nationales.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".