MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066986107

It Will Seem So Nice and Grown-Uppish : An analytical essay on development towards conservative gender roles in the novel Anne of Green Gables

2023· article· en· W7066986107 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDiVA (Södertörn University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConformityNiceGender equalityGender historyFeminist theoryPeriod (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this essay, an analysis of Lucy Montgomery's bildungsroman Anne of Green Gables has been conducted. The story of the protagonist Anne Shirley’s development into adulthood displays many aspects of the gender roles of the twentieth century in Canada as a result of her gendered upbringing. Anne's conformity to the private sphere stems from a need to solve her inherent crisis as an orphan but has the purpose of making domestic life seem desirable to the young reader. Anne of Green Gables was released in the twentieth century when women were considered to have universal traits that benefited the conservative gender roles. Therefore this essay analyses the didactic purpose of the novel, theorizing to find that the novel's purpose is to steer the reader's development toward conservative gender roles. Feminist theory provides this essay with explanations of the cause and effect of the notion of gender roles and is used as a guideline throughout the analysis. The results of this essay demonstrate that the bildungsroman Anne of Green Gables has a didactic purpose of steering the development of the reader toward the acceptance of conservative gender roles.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.026
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiVA (Södertörn University)Same topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207