Why Would You Get THAT Done?! Stigma Experiences of Women with Piercings and Tattoos Attending Postsecondary Schools Pourquoi voudriez-vous vous faire CELA ? ! Expériences de stigmatisation de femmes au niveau postsecondaire qui ont des perçages et tatouages
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research in the area of piercings and tattoos has indicated the existence of commonly held negative stereotypes and assumptions (stigmas) concerning these body practices. These stigmas have been shown to impact the hireability of those with body modification (BoM). In order to understand the experiences of women with piercings and tattoos who are entering the professional workforce, the first author interviewed 8 women attending postsecondary education between November 2011 and April 2012. Through analysis using a hermeneutic phenomenological approach, with a focus on experiences with work, friends, and family, 8 main themes emerged. Interpreting the data showed that, despite the increasing number of people with BoM, postsecondary women are still experiencing and/or anticipating workplace and familial stigma. resume
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it