MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965223135 · doi:10.1177/1045159514546214

Exploring Representations of <i>Super</i> Women in Popular Culture

2014· article· en· W1965223135 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

VenueAdult Learning · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsAssiniboine Community CollegeBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopular cultureContext (archaeology)FacilitationFoundation (evidence)SociologyFocus groupPopular mediaPsychologyPedagogyGender studiesMedia studiesHistoryAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we discuss how our analysis of several popular culture artifacts featuring super women characters (superheroes and supernatural) provided the foundation for a media discussion group for female college students with learning exceptionalities. We explore the use of popular culture in discussion groups as well as discuss the research context and discourse analysis method related to selected popular culture artifacts. We then relate the participants’ responses to the artifacts, emphasizing tensions and resistances associated with each. We review how our initial focus began with an emphasis on gender and gradually evolved to address ability. We reflect on possibilities, limitations, and challenges related to the facilitation of this and other media groups, offering practical recommendations for adult educators.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.252 · 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