MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6888859437 · doi:10.22024/unikent/01.02.88748

Validating Selfhood: Holocaust Survivor Communities and Experiential Kin in Postwar Britain

2021· article· en· W6888859437 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKent Academic Repository (University of Kent) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe HolocaustHolocaust survivorsRefugeeExperiential learningOrder (exchange)World War IIHistorical traumaJudaism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Those who survived the Holocaust settled predominantly, but not exclusively, in Israel, the United States, Canada, South America and, to a far lesser extent, Britain and other countries. This thesis will examine individuals who resided in Britain after the war and the organisations that they formed. It will consider how three survivor associations, the '45 Aid Society, Association of Jewish Refugees and the Child Survivors' Association of Great Britain, which mainly consisted of young survivors aged twenty-one and under in 1945, fostered validation for individuals. These organisations became communities for survivors and an example of 'experiential kin', where shared experiences lead to strong bonds and a sense of belonging. This thesis will reflect on how communities can be defined within these contexts and whether these were able to act as surrogate families for individual survivors as they developed in a postwar context. It also explores how a survivor can be defined, the hierarchies of suffering that form in response to fluid definitions, the role of the second generation and how survivors interpret current events through the lens of their experiences whilst maintaining composure in order to argue that the attainment of validation is a central quest for survivors. This thesis utilises a mixed methodology stemming primarily from newly conducted oral histories with Holocaust survivors in order to contextualise the origins of these communities and situate these groups into wider British society and cultural discourses. A key conclusion that this thesis draws is the importance of being considered a survivor within these groups and the significance of shared identity and belonging. This manifests through the central theme in this thesis of validation, where survivors seek to not just have their identities accepted as 'valid', but also their memories. Somewhat paradoxically, this aligns with a desire to remain 'in the background' and to be free to pursue their identities outside of their status as a survivor.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.018
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKent Academic Repository (University of Kent)Same topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207