MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134130550 · doi:10.3138/cjccj.52.3.303

Masculinity and Resistance in Adolescent Carceral Settings

2010· article· en· W2134130550 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Carla Cesaroni, Shahid Alvi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityHegemonic masculinityCONTESTResistance (ecology)SociologyIdentity (music)Gender studiesSubversionPrisonPower (physics)InstitutionPsychologySocial psychologyCriminologyAestheticsPoliticsPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The concept of hegemonic masculinity is a useful tool for critiquing and understanding narrow cultural constructions of masculinity, the diversity of men's real experiences, and the trajectory of power relations among men. One important tenet of the concept is that masculinities are often constructed, maintained, and restructured according to particular social networks in a given environment. Research that has been conducted on the impact of masculine prison environments has tended to focus on traditional adult male prisons. This paper offers a qualitative account of the lived experiences of 350 incarcerated Canadian male youth. It explores how everyday minor acts of subversion, assertions of youthful identity, and masculinity are used to contest and recast the meanings, directions, and restrictions imposed by the institution. We draw attention to the various ways in which these youth resist the experience of power, discipline, and formal social control. We highlight the ways in which masculinities and subcultural norms intersect to provide the psychological resources and frameworks within which these young people actively resist the experience of captivity, their captors, and the correctional environment.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

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

Citations37
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénaleSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207