MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413339077 · doi:10.1057/s41287-025-00717-5

Correction to: White Savior Narratives in International Development: A Discourse Analysis of the Kony2012 Campaign by Invisible Children

2025· article· en· W4413339077 on OpenAlexaff
Maïka Sondarjee

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Development Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeWhite (mutation)Media studiesHistoryWhite paperGender studiesPolitical scienceSociologyLinguisticsLiteratureArtPhilosophyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tout mon cœur me disait de faire quelque chose.Et donc je lui ai fait une promesse: nous allons aussi faire tout ce que nous pouvons pour les arrêter.»-Jason Russell dans la première vidéo de Kony 2012 (7:30) Au cours des dernières décennies, des réflexions sur le concept de sauveur blanc dans les pratiques de développement ont été publiées dans divers journaux non académiques, médias grand public, podcasts et blogs.Les exemples dans notre domaine abondent: une organisation occidentale lançant des campagnes d'aide utilisant une personne blanche aidant des victimes noires (par exemple, Médecins Sans Frontières en 2020); Haïti étant dépossédée de son autonomie par des interventions étrangères répétées (Sincimat Fleurant, « Imposition et reproduction du sauveur blanc en Haïti»), ou des entreprises facilitant l'accaparement des terres sous prétexte d'aider les citoyens locaux (Kakuru, « Le sauveur blanc, le secteur des entreprises et les droits fonciers en Ouganda central»).Des groupes d'activistes comme No White Saviors et Charity So White ont développé une expertise sur le sujet et l'ont promue sur les réseaux sociaux et lors de conférences publiques.D'autres ont créé des comptes ironiques pour sensibiliser aux tendances du sauveur blanc dans notre domaine, comme Humanitarians on Tinder, White Savior Barbie, ou Aid Worker Jesus.Des étudiants norvégiens ont également produit des courts métrages primés

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0100.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.019

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.338 · 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
GenreEditorial

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 venueEuropean Journal of Development ResearchSame topicPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareFrench-language works237,207