MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7138348007 · doi:10.5038/1911-9933.19.2.2058

Book Review: <em>The Role of Civil Society in Transitional Justice: The Case of Russia</em>

2025· article· W7138348007 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Myra Dahgaypaw

Bibliographic record

VenueGenocide Studies and Prevention · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSoviet and Russian History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransitional justiceCivil societyGenocideAuthoritarianismState (computer science)Government (linguistics)Accountability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This book review evaluates Selbi Durdiyeva's The Role of Civil Society in Transitional Justice: The Case of Russia as a vital contribution to genocide prevention scholarship, which is particularly timely given Russia's mass atrocity crimes in Ukraine and their connection to domestic repression. The book's theoretical innovation in challenging state-centric transitional justice paradigms through rigorous analysis of Memorial NGO, Orthodox Church activities, and revisionist groups across three decades of post-Soviet Russia is critical for the transitional justice field. It is worth highlighting Durdiyeva's unique postcolonial perspective as someone from a former Soviet territory studying the metropole, and her demonstration that civil society can substitute for absent government mechanisms rather than merely filling gaps. However, it is important to note the limitations including the study's Russia-specific focus limiting generalizability, insufficient victim perspectives, and limited assessment of resource efficiency compared to potential state mechanisms. Despite these constraints, the book offers indispensable insights for scholars working in authoritarian contexts where traditional accountability mechanisms fail, though comparative analysis with other post-Soviet states could strengthen its broader applicability.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
GenreReview

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 venueGenocide Studies and PreventionSame topicSoviet and Russian HistoryFrench-language works237,207