MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899836668

Changing On The Fly: Radical Sports Journalism and Social Justice in Hockey

2018· dissertation· en· W2899836668 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aaron Lakoff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIce hockeyJournalismNationalismPolitical scienceMedia studiesIdeologySociology of sportPolitical radicalismSociologyGender studiesPoliticsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research-creation M.A. thesis involves engaging with an important emerging media trend that I call “radical sports journalism”. Radical sports journalism investigates how political power is manifested and contested both through and around sports. The last year has witnessed widespread protests in sports to various forms of oppression, yet why have such protests not permeated the hockey world in North America? As a media practitioner, researcher, and hockey enthusiast, I am very interested in how sports journalism and broadcasting can be mobilized to create circumstances for a better world. However, very little radical sports journalism has touched on hockey in Canada. This research involves interviews with athletes, sports scholars, and hockey commentators whose work looks at gender, sexuality, race and nationalism in hockey. I examine how Canadian nationalist ideologies are deployed, reinforced and contested through hockey. The final product of this research-creation project is a podcast series showcasing my interviews.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0240.028
Scholarly communication0.0150.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.281 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207