MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2937227376 · doi:10.1177/1060826519841473

Man Up but Stay Smooth: Hybrid Masculinities in Advertising for Men’s Grooming Products

2019· article· en· W2937227376 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Men s Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Gender, and Advertising
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityBodyworkProduct placementAdvertisingContext (archaeology)NarrativeHeterosexualitySociologyProduct (mathematics)Construct (python library)Gender studiesArtHistoryHuman sexualityBusinessComputer scienceLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we address the question of how masculinities are constructed in advertising for the burgeoning market of men’s grooming products. We present findings from a thematic analysis of all grooming product advertisements found in Esquire magazine from 2011 to 2013. Based on the results, we emphasize the ways in which these ads construct “hybrid” and “flexible” masculinities through combining symbols and narratives relating to bodywork, power, heterosexuality, work, family, and nostalgia. While the constructions of masculinity we see in these ads are hybridized and flexible, we argue that men’s grooming product advertising should be read as marketing a contemporary “crisis” of masculinity in the context of late-modern consumer culture.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.276 · 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