MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318010517 · doi:10.1177/1060826516641373

Proposing a New Approach to the Research on Men’s Organizations

2016· article· en· W2318010517 on OpenAlexaff
Hakim Ben Salah, Jean-Martin Deslauriers, René Knüsel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Men s Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyFeminismSociologyGender studiesPolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes a study of men’s groups in Switzerland, in which both the official positions of the men’s organizations ( N = 40) as well as the opinions of their members ( N = 324) are examined using a mixed methods research design. This research strategy revealed significant ideological fault lines within the men’s organizations, ranging from explicitly affirmed anti-feminism to radical profeminist positions. At the same time, the mixed methods approach uncovered the existence of a shared view that transcends these fault lines, a view common to all types of men’s organizations. In light of these findings, the methodological approach used in this study is compared with that employed in the landmark studies of men’s movements from the 1990s.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.254
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Men s StudiesSame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207