{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02129547471162378, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00709849157054126, 'mean_word_length': 5.5964912280701755, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Embracing Amateurs: Four Practices to Subvert Academic Gatekeeping

ABSTRACT Citational practices function as a form of academic gatekeeping. To create a more inclusive scholarship, authors must consciously commit to embracing the contributions of all researchers, including amateurs. I base my case on Mildred Crowl Martin's biography of Donaldina Cameron, a New Zealand-born moral reformer in San Francisco's Chinatown. Martin undertook extensive original research during the late 1960s, and materials she compiled form the basis for an archival collection at Stanford University that researchers still consult today. However, Martin also admitted to incorporating a ‘few fictionalized scenes’ into her biography, and because she wrote for a popular audience, Martin omitted references in her texts. These two decisions left her vulnerable to charges of amateurism. Nonetheless, more than fifty monographs, book chapters, and journal articles from the 1980s to the present cited her biography. This success makes a fascinating case study for deriving research practices that fulfil our intellectual debts to all predecessors.