MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414978030 · doi:10.1353/his.2025.a971517

Heroes and Villains: The Victorian Royal National Lifeboat Institution and Everyday Heroism

2025· article· en· W4414978030 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sam Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire sociale · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAustralian History and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionCourageReputationPromotion (chess)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: The 200-year history of the UK’s Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI), despite its longevity, has received scant scholarly attention. The RNLI exploited the Victorian fascination with “everyday heroism” to enhance its reputation and funding. This was most evident with Charles Fish, the celebrated coxswain at Ramsgate on the Kent coast, who represented the qualities of selflessness and courage found in Victorian imaginaries of lifeboat crews. And yet controversies arose when volunteers departed from the RNLI’s idealized norms and the public’s imaginaries. The promotion of Fish as an “everyday hero” contrasts with allegations made against Kent’s and other North Sea lifeboat crews of incompetence, ill-discipline, cowardice, and greed. Tensions over salvage claims resulted from a highly centralized organization’s attempts to manage volunteers in remote coastal communities; despite such controversies, however, RNLI crews continued to be represented and viewed by the public as “everyday heroes.” Abstract: Forte de 200 ans d’histoire, la Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) du Royaume-Uni, malgré sa longévité, n’a reçu que peu d’attention de la part des chercheurs et chercheuses. La RNLI a exploité la fascination victorienne pour l’« héroïsme quotidien » afin d’améliorer sa réputation et son financement. Charles Fish, le célèbre barreur de Ramsgate, sur la côte du Kent, en est la preuve la plus évidente. Il représentait les qualités d’altruisme et de courage que l’on retrouve dans l’imaginaire victorien des équipages de bateaux de sauvetage. Pourtant, des controverses ont surgi lorsque les bénévoles s’écartaient des normes idéalisées de la RNLI et de l’imaginaire du public. La promotion de Fish en tant que « héros de tous les jours » contraste avec les allégations d’incompétence, d’indiscipline, de lâcheté et de cupidité formulées à l’encontre des équipages à bord des bateaux de sauvetage de Kent et de ceux de la mer du Nord. Les tensions concernant les réclamations de récupération ont résulté des tentatives d’une organisation très centralisée de gérer des bénévoles dans des communautés côtières éloignées; malgré ces controverses, les équipages de la RNLI ont continué à être représentés et perçus par le public comme des « héros du quotidien ».

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.026
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 venueHistoire socialeSame topicAustralian History and SocietyFrench-language works237,207