MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2625202297 · doi:10.29173/cais289

The Production of “Gayness”: How Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual (LGB) Youth Negotiate Sexual Orientation in a Networked World

2013· article· fr· W2625202297 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stephen Joyce

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesbianSexual orientationNegotiationMale HomosexualityHomosexualitySociologyPsychologyGender studiesHumanitiesArtHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)MedicineMen who have sex with men

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores how and where lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) youth acquire informational capital about sexual orientation in an increasingly networked world. Findings are based on discourse analysis and close reading of 31 unstructured in-depth interviews with LGB youth as well as larger LGB-themed “texts” presented through mass media.Cet article explore comment et à quel endroit les jeunes lesbiennes, gays et bisexuels (LGB) font l’acquisition du capital informationnel traitant d’orientation sexuelle dans un monde de plus en plus resauté. Les résultats se basent sur l’analyse du discours et la lecture complète de 31 entrevues en profondeur non structurées effectuées avec des jeunes LGB, de même que d’un vaste ensemble de textes reliés au thème des LGB présentés à travers les moyens de communication de masses.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI→Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→