MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W596158542 · doi:10.1891/1062-8061.11.1.195

The Rise of Caring Power: Elizabeth Fry and Josephine Butler in Britain and the Netherlands

2003· book· en· W596158542 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing History Review · 2003
Typebook
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower (physics)Ideal (ethics)SociologyGender studiesTRACE (psycholinguistics)Michel foucaultHistoryPolitical scienceLawPhilosophyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This original study discusses the role of women in developing and dispersing and, vice-versa, the role of in constituting 'women' as modern social subjects, processes which began around 1800. Based on the historian-/philosopher Foucault's concept of pastoral power, caring power also takes into account the vital role played by gender. Both humanitarian and religious motives fostered the ideal of serving the well-being of individual 'others' and thereby the interest of society as a whole. With the rise of power, this book argues, women began to feel responsible for 'those of their own sex' and to organize themselves in all-female organizations. In the process they carved out new gender identities for themselves and the women in their care. The authors illustrate this profound historical change with the work of the reformers Elizabeth Fry (1780-1845) and Josephine Butler (1828-1906) and trace their impact in Britain and the Netherlands.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.208 · 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