MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1960332419 · doi:10.14742/ajet.1327

Gender and CMC: A review on conflict and harassment

2005· review· en· W1960332419 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Journal of Educational Technology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKnowledge Management and Sharing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarassmentPerceptionPsychologySocial psychologyFocus (optics)Set (abstract data type)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<span>This paper reviews the literature related to gender and communication in CMC environments. A brief summary of gender related literature concerning general communication patterns in CMC is outlined first, to set the stage. Then, a review of literature in gender and CMC with a specific focus on conflict and harassment is presented. Comments upon this diverse body of work and recommendations concerning possible areas for future research are offered.</span><p>The focus on content and communicative practices in CMC highlights the possibilities of new gendered identities being constructed through online interactions. These new gendered identities may appear in a different form from the more fixed forms of "real life." In particular, the research reviewed in this paper regarding harassment, along with previous studies, leads "one to conclude that the 'democratic' perception of CMC is seriously flawed".</p>

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.672

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.117
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.325 · 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