MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7125923290 · doi:10.17813/1086-671x-30-4-409

EXTREME PROTESTS: CHANGING PROTEST REPERTOIRES IN LABOR MOVEMENTS IN NEOLIBERAL KOREA*

2025· article· W7125923290 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMobilization An International Quarterly · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Industrial and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial movementPower (physics)State (computer science)RepertoireScholarshipDemocracyCivil societyNewspaperMovement (music)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study focuses on the question of changing protest repertoires and asks what explains the emergence of extreme repertoires (a protest form that is lone in nature, accompanied by a high level of self-imposed danger and pain, and staged for a collective cause) in labor movements in times of institutionalized democracy and capitalist affluence in South Korea. Social movement scholarship has emphasized that massive structural transformations, such as nation-state building, industrialization, and regime types, give birth to renovated protest forms. This study moves beneath these nation-state oriented, structural arguments for protest repertoire change, and explicates how the varied positions of the sectoral movement within power relations vis-a-vis state institutions, corporations, and civil society inform activists to choose alternative protest methods. The arguments are based on protest repertoires data collected and coded from newspaper reports in 1999-2019 as well as interviews with labor activists and their published writings in 2017-2022.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.270 · 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