MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133075767

"I saw what I saw": the media creates a miracle cure for anorexia

2002· dissertation· W7133075767 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michelle Lianne Stack

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2002
Typedissertation
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature, Film, and Journalism Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMiracleCharismaNewspaperCONTESTIdeologyMainstream
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation is a critical case study, which explores the role of the media from 1993 to 1997 in creating Peggy Claude-Pierre as an "angel on earth" and "the last hope" for anorexics. Claude-Pierre founded Montreux Counselling after curing her two daughters of anorexia nervosa. She was featured in a number of magazines, newspaper articles, radio programs, American talk-shows, ABC's 20/20, and NBC's Dateline, as well as programs in Germany, Australia, Canada and the UK. This dissertation further examines the period from 1997 to 2000 in which there was a contest of representations about whether Claude-Pierre was an "angel" or a dangerously charismatic leader of a "cult-like" facility. I approach this study from the perspective that Montreux cannot be understood outside of the common notions of gender, class, and race, nor outside the common understandings of illness, miracles, and science. I propose that the rise of Montreux to prominence within a short period of time is connected to the economic and ideological nature of the media and of professional culture--both maintain a mystique about their ability to "know" and tell the "truth." It is this paradigm of objectivity and progress from whence their knowledge is conveyed to the public. I argue that the media and professionals, in conjunction with discourses of both miracles and empiricism, were all integral to creating Montreux as a world-famous center. The media based their claims about Montreux on testimonials. They ignored their own role in creating Claude-Pierre; therefore, they left the role and responsibility of journalists and talk show hosts as the most powerful storytellers, unchallenged.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.263 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicLiterature, Film, and Journalism AnalysisFrench-language works237,207