Beyond the Superordinate Categories of “Gay Men” and “Lesbian Women”: Identification of Gay and Lesbian Subgroups
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nation-wide opinion polls and social scientific studies indicate that evaluations of gay men and lesbian women have become increasingly favourable. These positive trends do not explain the widespread discrimination experiences being reported. To assist researchers in investigating attitudes towards gay and lesbian persons, the current research examines whether there are multiple “types” that are identifiable and salient. Two Canadian studies (Ns = 67 and 206) were conducted to establish the presence of gay and lesbian subgroups. Using subgroups generated by Study 1 participants, community and student sub-samples selected those they perceive to exist. Results indicated that, for gay men, the subgroups Drag Queen and Flamboyant emerged, as did Butch for lesbian women. Amongst students, Closeted and Feminine also emerged for gay men, as well as Feminist and Tomboy for lesbian women. These findings have implications for contemporary research on gay- and lesbian-related attitudes and the methodology used to assess them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it