MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990167948 · doi:10.1080/1040265042000318626

The Sociology of Youth Subcultures

2004· article· en· W1990167948 on OpenAlexaff
Alan O’Connor

Bibliographic record

VenuePeace Review · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologySocial classLife chancesWorking classTheme (computing)Class (philosophy)Everyday lifeBlameGender studiesSocial scienceSocial psychologyPoliticsPsychologyEpistemologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main theme in the sociology of youth subcultures is the reladon between social class and everyday experience. There are many ways of thinking about social class. In the work of the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu the main factors involved are parents' occupation and level of education. These have signilicant effects on the life chances of their children. Social class is not a social group: the idea is not that working class kids or middle class kids only hang out together. There may be some of this in any school or town. Social class is a structure. It is shown to exist by sociological research and many people may only be partly aware of these structures or may lack the vocabulary to talk about them. It is often the case that people blame themselves—their bad school grades or dead-end job—for what are, at least in part, the effects of a system of social class that has had significant effects on their lives. The main point of Bourdieu's research is to show that many kids never had a fair chance from the beginning. I n spite of talk about globalizadon there are significant differences between different sociedes. Social class works differently in France, Mexico and the U.S. For example, the educadon system is different in each country. In studying issues of youth culture, it is important to take these differences into account. The system of social class in each country is always experienced in complex ways. These include differences between living in the city, a provincial town or the country. In many societies—including the United States—social class is lived out as differences in ethnicity. In most societies there are also significant gender differences. We wdll expect to find the effects of these differences in youth subcultures. In American sociology in the 1950s—a very conservadve time in academic research—research on youth gangs and deviance indirectly showed the effects of class. It was argued that youth who cannot achieve according to social norms, who cannot do well in school or find good jobs, create subcultures. These in turn have their own roles and norms which these youth can fulfill. The idea was that youth who do badly at school create their own litde societies in which they can achieve status by smoking, being tough or engaging in petty crime. This actually extends beyond youth. Black men who were in effect excluded from good jobs in straight society could perhaps achieve success in their own terms through a deviant career as a jazz musician. British research on subcultures in the 1970s had as its goal to argue against

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.038
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeace ReviewSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207