MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7011771852

Native American Stereotyping in Peter Pan: A Modern Solution?

2021· other· en· W7011771852 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNative americanTribeRepresentation (politics)MulticulturalismReading (process)White (mutation)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past few decades, readers and viewers have become more critical about representations of minority groups, including representations of gender, race, and ethnicity. This has forced makers of new adaptations to critically think about how to adapt certain aspects of their older source text. This thesis investigates such an adaptation, namely the 2015 film Pan (directed by Joe Wright, based on J.M. Barrie’s Peter Pan (1911)), which took a transcultural approach and transformed the controversial Native American tribe into an abstract, imagined, and multicultural community. Through close reading and close viewing, this thesis provides an analysis of the representation of the tribe in both Peter Pan and Pan and shows that despite Wright’s efforts to remove the Native American aspects of the story, the film still includes various Native American stereotypes and a white supremacist discourse, similar to those present in the novel. While this particular version does thus not succeed at removing these contested aspects, this thesis does argue that the approach could still be favourable but suggests further research is needed.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.013
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University)Same topicPrenatal Screening and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207