From the bottom of a bottle: A sociological examination of the use of alcohol in varsity sport hazing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is an examination of the role of alcohol and its central place in university sport hazing rituals, whereby veteran team members require new team members to participate in a rite of passage to gain full access to team membership. Academic research studies as well as media reports on sport hazing reveal the significant extent to which alcohol is closely tied to dangerous behaviors in team initiation rituals. Data was collected using in-depth interviews with varsity athletes, coaches and athletic directors at Canadian universities. The participants discussed their experiences with hazing and provided their perspective on the role of alcohol in university team hazing activities. In our analysis, we applied a sociological lens informed by the work of Theodor Adorno, using a negative dialectic approach to highlight the gap between the actual undesirable impact of team hazing and alcohol in collegiate sport and the potential of collegiate sport to provide a positive contribution to the lives of student-athletes; this negative dialectic approach reveals the social and institutional structures in place which promote the harmful incorporation of alcohol (abuse) in sport, while revealing how change within those very structures can lead to positive change. These data can thus be used to inform programs and policies aimed at improving the transitional experiences of varsity student-athletes, subsequently enhancing the overall culture of university sport.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".