MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1606651050

Self-deprecatory Humour and the Female Comic:

2002· article· en· W1606651050 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThirdspace · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHumor Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComicsComedyHostilityContext (archaeology)Style (visual arts)LiteratureArtPsychologyHistorySocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the stance of women in comedy and in particular the assumption that self-deprecatory humour is the domain of female comics. Examining the standup routines of eighty-six performers--twenty-two female, sixty-four male--from the mid-1980s to the 1990s comedic strategies are isolated by type and the gender of the comedian. The transcripts of the routines are specifically analyzed in terms of the targets of the satire and the degree of hostility (whether self or socially directed) involved. Context for the analysis consists of a section on three comics well-known for self-putdowns: Phyllis Diller, Joan Rivers, and Rodney Dangerfield. The results of this study reveal that female comics are no relying on self-deprecation as a sustained style. It is no longer the survival strategy it once was for women in comedy. As the presence of female comics increases the need to assuage audience fear/hostility decreases. The mask of self-loathing is removed and the comedic observations are given full voice.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.265 · 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