A Better Race of Human Beings: Eugenics in the American Media, 1900-1909
Bibliographic record
Abstract
the term "eugenics."His work Essays in Eugenics, published in 1909, defined the term as "the science which deals with all influences that improve the inborn qualities of a race; also with those that develop them to the utmost advantage." 1 Various incarnations of this sciencebased ideology took hold in Europe and the United States during the early decades of the twentieth century.The strongest period of eugenics support in the United States occurred in the 1920s and the 1930s, following the establishment of the Eugenics Record Office (ERO) in 1910 and the 1927 Supreme Court decision in Buck v. Bell, which upheld the constitutionality of forced sterilization.Support for eugenics grew in response to several large-scale processes and pressures.The intense industrialization at the end of the nineteenth century continued through the early decades of the twentieth century and drove a similar trend of urbanization.2 Concurrently, fear of the fertility of newly arrived immigrants sparked panic about "race suicide," which was the belief that the reckless breeding of the lower classes and unfit would eventually overwhelm the approved reproduction of the white
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".