MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808346789 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs93201818274

COME ALONG WITH ME: LINKING LGBTQ YOUTH TO SUPPORTIVE RESOURCES

2018· article· en· W2808346789 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jennifer Wolowic, Richard Sullivan, Cheryl Ann B. Valdez, Carolyn M. Porta, Marla E. Eisenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsQueerTransgenderLesbianFeelingAgency (philosophy)PsychologyIsolation (microbiology)HomosexualityGender studiesSexual orientationSocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we examine how lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) youth, who tend to experience greater feelings of isolation and discrimination than heterosexual youth, find and become integrated into supportive activities and resources. As part of a larger study on supportive lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer youth environments, 66 go-along interviews with LGBTQ youth, from Massachusetts, Minnesota, and British Columbia were conducted. Analysis of these interviews identified important cues that prompt self-agency and integration into supportive environments and affirmative identities. In particular, we argue <em>indirect links </em>or cues<em> </em>such as media and print advertisements increase awareness of supports and resources, while <em>personal links,</em> such as referrals from trusted friends, adults, and regularly attended programs, can help youth form denser networks of support.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207