MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415150486 · doi:10.1111/jola.70029

Alienable gesture

2025· article· en· W4415150486 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Robyn Holly Taylor‐Neu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Linguistic Anthropology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersErasmus+Deutscher Akademischer AustauschdienstSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaWenner-Gren Foundation
KeywordsGestureAlienationEmbodied cognitionArticulation (sociology)ReflexivityEthnographyAnimationSalience (neuroscience)Mediation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article explores one dimension of gestures' mediation through ethnographic research with Berlin‐based auteur animation filmmakers. In positioning gestures as extricable from embodied and environmental contexts, my interlocutors flex the aesthetic and critical potential of what I call gestural alienability . To understand how these artists de‐ and recontextualize bodily movements, I engage linguistic anthropological writings on gesture and contextualization. Drawing on 2 years of participant observation and conversation, I propose that such processes of gestural alienation underpin the critical (yet unpredictable) potential of mediated gestures to creatively index contexts beyond the immediate or self‐evident. Although I focus on auteur animation filmmaking in Berlin as a sharp, reflexive articulation of gestural alienability, the concept has broader salience with respect to the reenactment and (re)mediation of gestures across sites, moments, and materialities.

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)0.005
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 venueJournal of Linguistic AnthropologySame topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207