MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083166238 · doi:10.18485/fpregled.2025.52.1.6

Trauma and Its Aftermath in Michelle Good’s <i>Five Little Indians</i>

2025· article· en· W7083166238 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueФилолошки преглед · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Perspective (graphical)Poison controlPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Residential schools for Indigenous children are one of the darkest chapters of Canadian history, and their effects are still felt to this day.Unfortunately, these traumatic effects on survivors are not discussed enough.Therefore, this paper analyzes Michelle Good's novel Five Little Indians (2020), and the plot which follows five characters and their lives after their stay at a residential school in British Columbia, the ensuing traumas, and their ways of coping in a world where they face daily oppression.The novel provides insight into different characters, and their points of view.This is a fruitful basis for analyzing different ways of coping with the traumatic past and the traumatizing present.The theoretical framework in this paper is based on trauma studies, mainly on works written by trauma theorists such as Judith Herman, Dori Laub, Shoshana Felman, and others.The paper hopefully contributes to a much needed discussion on the horrible mistreatment of Indigenous people in Canada, and sheds light on the lived-through trauma, as well as its aftermath.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0220.020
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueФилолошки прегледSame topicDiverse Scientific and Economic StudiesFrench-language works237,207