MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7054503602

Análise de discurso religioso: mecanismos acionados por líderes religiosos nas pregações em programas de televisão

2018· article· pt· W7054503602 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAmericanae (AECID Library) · 2018
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEngineering
TopicMagneto-Optical Properties and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubject (documents)Context (archaeology)Field (mathematics)Power (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esta pesquisa se refere à investigação de um campo surgido na interface entre mídia e religião e tem por objetivos apontar os mecanismos discursivos acionados por algumas lideranças religiosas em suas pregações em programas abertos de televisão, além de compreender as possíveis similitudes e diferenças desses mecanismos. Esse contato entre campos simbólicos aparentemente distintos (FOUCAULT, 1979; BOURDIEU, 1989) permite a reconfiguração de ambas as esferas, a religiosa e a midiática (ASSMANN, 1986, CUNHA, 2002, 2007), considerando o sujeito em questão, fiel, inserido na concepção neoliberal (DARDOT; LAVAL, 2016). Assim, utilizou-se a Análise de Discurso de filiação Francesa, no que diz respeito, sobretudo, aos conceitos de formação discursiva, enunciado e cena enunciativa e formação de sentido (ORLANDI, 1987, 1996, 2005, 2009; MAINGUENEU, 2015) a fim de analisar os referidos discursos proferidos pelos líderes religiosos, quais sejam, Divaldo Pereira Franco, espírita; Valdemiro Santiago, neopentecostal; e Padre Marcelo Rossi, católico em seus programas, respectivamente, “Conversando com Divaldo”, “culto Dominical do Poder de Deus” e “Santa Missa com Padre Marcelo”. Considerou-se, também, os dizeres estruturantes não-verbais, como gestual, vocal e movimentação de câmera, no intuito de melhor compreender o discurso em seu contexto televisivo. Os levantamentos apontam para núcleos discursivos em comum, principalmente quando se observam as possibilidades midiáticas, e para certos desvios discursivos, ao se atentar para o caráter religioso inerente a cada programa em questão.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.223
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmericanae (AECID Library)Same topicMagneto-Optical Properties and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207