MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1962939238 · doi:10.1177/1012690214539958

Assessing the sociology of sport: On sport and exercise

2015· article· en· W1962939238 on OpenAlexaff
Pirkko Markula

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review for the Sociology of Sport · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociology of sportSociologySports sciencePower (physics)Physical educationPhysical cultureIdeal (ethics)Physical fitnessSocial scienceCultural studiesEpistemologyPedagogyPolitical scienceAnthropologyLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the 50th anniversary of the ISSA and IRSS, Pirkko Markula, a leading poststructuralist scholar, assesses the trajectory, challenges, and future for sociology of sport research on exercise, fitness and physical cultures. The trajectory of more openly politicized examinations of power in sport as cultural studies entered Anglo-American sociology of sport in the 1990s coincided with an expanded focus on the cultures of physical activity and exercise, notably with critique of the feminine body ideal in the fitness industry. Key challenges for the future include mending a ‘disconnect’ in the tensions between critical analysis and actual physical activity education and practices, furthering scholarly commitment to interdisciplinarity, and for poststructuralist theorizing to reach beyond sport studies to serve as a platform for thinking differently about exercise practices and scientific understandings of the moving body.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.019
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review for the Sociology of SportSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207