MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059768584 · doi:10.1177/1097184x00002004002

Virtual Virility, or, Does Medicine Make the Man?

2000· article· en· W2059768584 on OpenAlex
Elizabeth Haiken

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

VenueMen and Masculinities · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirilityAttractivenessFeminization (sociology)AestheticsNarcissismPhysical attractivenessSociologyGender studiesPsychologySocial psychologyMasculinityArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While men continue to enjoy a privileged position in the physical market, increasing numbers of American men are pursuing enhancement technologies ranging from hair transplants to penile augmentation. Contemporary discourse that positions these efforts to alter appearance as evidence of a masculine drive for economic success rather than as part of a feminine narcissism reflects historical biases against male preoccupation with appearance; contemporary discourse that acclaims these efforts as liberating for American men minimizes the extent to which men, like women, are vulnerable to market-driven cultural imperatives regarding physical attractiveness.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.293 · 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