MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792932271 · doi:10.1080/00224499.2018.1437593

Sex With Chinese Characteristics: Sexuality Research in/on 21st-Century China

2018· review· en· W2792932271 on OpenAlexaff
Petula Sik Ying Ho, Stevi Jackson, Siyang Cao, Chi Kwok

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sex Research · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualityGender studiesChinaSociologyPoliticsAuthoritarianismContext (archaeology)Construct (python library)NegotiationSubjectivityPolitical scienceDemocracySocial scienceHistoryEpistemologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the changing contours of Chinese sexuality studies by locating recent research in historical context. Our aim is to use the literature we review to construct a picture of the sexual landscape in China and the sociocultural and political conditions that have shaped it, enabling readers unfamiliar with China to understand its sexual culture and practices. In particular, we focus on the consequences of recent changes under the Xi regime for individuals' sexual lives and for research into sexuality. While discussing the social and political regulation of sexuality, we also attend to the emergence of new forms of gendered and sexual subjectivity in postsocialist China. We argue throughout that sexuality in China is interwoven with the political system in a variety of ways, in particular through the tension between neoliberal and authoritarian styles of governance. We explore normative and dissident sexualities as well as forms of sexual conduct that are officially "deviant" but nonetheless tolerated or even tacitly enabled by the party-state. In particular, we highlight the dilemmas and contradictions faced by China's citizens as they negotiate their sexual lives under "socialism with Chinese characteristics."

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations146
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sex ResearchSame topicSex work and related issuesFrench-language works237,207