MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090739450 · doi:10.1080/17460263.2010.488380

Against Hegemonic Currents: Women's Rowing into the First Half of the Twentieth Century

2010· article· en· W2090739450 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda N. Schweinbenz

Bibliographic record

VenueSport in History · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRowingAmateurEliteLivelihoodGender studiesPolitical scienceSociologyHistoryPoliticsLawAgricultureArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While women's rowing events were formally introduced onto the programme of the European Rowing Championships in 1954, oarswomen had long been paddling across lakes and rivers throughout the world. As early as the 1500s, there were references made to women's participation in the sport. However, like other sports, the majority of information on the history of rowing has focussed primarily on men's participation. It has been recognized that socially elite men were the sole participants in the sport of rowing at private clubs and academic institutions during their leisure time, while working-class men rowed along canals, rivers and lakes throughout the world for their livelihood. As a result, the elite were able to define who was permitted to participate in ‘amateur’ rowing and on what terms, while professional rowing was reserved for labourers. This article seeks to examine the history of women's participation in the sport of rowing prior to the middle of the twentieth-century. It will show that early female rowing enthusiasts were not mere bystanders; when they found themselves excluded, female rowers were not deterred from participation and created their own rowing opportunities.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSport in HistorySame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207