MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029195168 · doi:10.1080/10810730600934708

“Live and Let Live”: An Analysis of HIV/AIDS-Related Stigma and Discrimination in International Campaign Posters

2006· article· en· W2029195168 on OpenAlexaff
Leanne Johnny, Claudia Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Communication · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia Studies and Communication
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStigma (botany)DeclarationIdeologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)SociologyMedia studiesPsychologyGender studiesMedicineLawPoliticsPolitical scienceFamily medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a corollary to The Declaration of Commitment adopted by the United Nations General Assembly Special Session on HIV/AIDS in June 2001, UNAIDS developed a World AIDS Campaign that sought to eradicate HIV/AIDS-related stigma and discrimination. The campaign incorporated several educational strategies, including a poster campaign that advocated the just and equal treatment of people living with HIV/AIDS. In an effort to develop an understanding of these educational efforts, this study deconstructs the 2002-2003 World AIDS Campaign posters. While the overall results suggest that the campaign has been successful in redefining images of HIV/AIDS, they also show that certain aspects of these posters may actually serve to reinforce stigma and discrimination. Using a visual studies approach to textual analysis, this study explores the underlying ideological and cultural assumptions that exist within the posters and provides a method for evaluating such materials.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations93
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health CommunicationSame topicMedia Studies and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207