Research Report: Publications by religious organisations during the Covid-19 pandemic in Germany
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic hit religious organisations as strong as other societal actors. In secularizing societies, such as Germany, religious organisations had to not only adapt their religious practices and organisational ways to the circumstances of the pandemic, but also communicate their positions to the public and maintain their political and societal status. In this report, the analysis of the publications of four religious organisations (the Roman Catholic Church, the German Protestant Church, Muslim Communities and the Anthroposophical Society) with regard to three areas is described: 1. How do religious organisations discuss illness, health and science? 2. How do the religious organisations position themselves with regard to government and policymakers? 3. How did religious organisations use digital innovations in the pandemic? The report covers data from the first step of a three-year, multi-disciplinary research project analysing the role of religion in societies emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic. RECOV-19 compares the changing role of religions in four secularising global north contexts: Canada, Germany, the Republic of Ireland/Northern Ireland, and Poland. This report is a result of the project "The Changing Role of Religion in Societies Emerging from Covid-19" (ReCov-19) (2022 - 2025) funded by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Grant Number 495586629).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.036 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it