Picturing Masculinities: Using Photoelicitation in Men’s Health Research
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
This article explores the use of photo-elicitation methods in two men's health studies. Discussed are the ways that photo-elicitation can facilitate conversation about health issues that might be otherwise challenging to access. In the first study, researchers explored 35 young men's experiences of grief following the accidental death of a male peer. In the second study, researchers describe 64 fathers' perceptions about their roles and identity with respect to child safety and risk. Photographs and accompanying narratives were analyzed and results were theorized using a masculinities framework. Discussed are the benefits of photo-elicitation, which include facilitating conversation about emotions, garnering insight into the structures and identities of masculinity in the context of men's health. Considered also are some methodological challenges amid recommendations for ensuring reflexive practices. Based on the findings it is concluded that photo-elicitation can innovatively advance qualitative research in men's health.
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 | 0.073 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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