Barn razing: Change and continuity in identity during conflict
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation seeks to understand how the identity of a particular people, Mennonites, changes and remains constant during periods of conflict, over time. Identity is approached from a symbolic interactionist and sociological (social) constructivist stance. Using an adapted historical, grounded theory methodology, it explores how a group defines itself during three, decade-long periods of conflict in the twentieth century. The three temporally and geographically bounded periods of conflict in focus are: 1914-1924 Russia/Ukraine, 1934-1944 western Canada, 1977-1987 western Canada (Saskatchewan). The sites of conflict raise competing affiliation demands around identification with the state, religious beliefs, land and belonging. The grounded theory constant comparative method is used to uncover the structure of the concepts and categories comprising Mennonite identity that are utilized by Mennonite leaders during the three periods of conflict. Each conflict site is described in detail followed by an analysis of the categories of identification; the categories and properties that emerge provide a substantive theory of Mennonite identity over time. The dissertation also investigates the dynamics of continuity and change in the content of the categories. Three levels of change are evident: (1) subtle shifts and minor adaptations to context; (2) major fluctuations and temporary suspensions in the use of properties or categories; (3) properties and categories that are discontinued from use. The first two levels of change promote and enable continuity in Mennonite identification. The third level, discontinuity, is then explored in greater depth focusing on detachment from place (the Russian Steppe) and language (German). Taken together these examples highlight the interplay between external factors that promote change and the internal factors that are necessary for change but which also contribute to continuity over time. The dissertation utilizes and contributes to Rogers Smith's notion of "political peoplehood," demonstrating that an entire political people may seek to inspire a sense of "worth" and "trust," and may further integrate these concepts into their group identification. Finally, the research contributes a methodology that identifies a relatively stable core set of categories of identification, as well as probing the dynamics of change over time.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".