MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896008304 · doi:10.1177/1329878x18803730

Understanding the ways missing and murdered Indigenous women are framed and handled by social media users

2018· article· en· W2896008304 on OpenAlexaffabout
Taima Moeke-Pickering, Sheila Cote-Meek, Ann Pegoraro

Bibliographic record

VenueMedia International Australia · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousCognitive reframingGender studiesIdeologySociologySocial mediaPublishingProject commissioningPolitical scienceMedia studiesCriminologySocial psychologyPsychologyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The media plays a large role in facilitating negative racial and gender ideologies about Indigenous women. In Canada, as we struggle with the national crisis of missing and murdered Indigenous women (MMIW), researchers have collected data from social media (SM) and identified that subversive texts about Indigenous women perpetuate a racialized violent discourse. Given that many Indigenous peoples, including Indigenous youth, have smart phones and/or other ways to access SM they too are exposed to the discourse that subjugates, vilifies and dehumanizes Indigenous women, many of whom are family or community members. Our research investigates the messages shared on #MMIW and identifies a reframing by hashtag users. The results assist in understanding how SM plays a role in perpetuating stereotypes about Indigenous peoples but also how SM can be used to mitigate those messages.

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 score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0060.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.171
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations31
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedia International AustraliaSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207