MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3025738679

INUIT GIRLS MAKE MEDIA: RESISTING STEREOTYPES THROUGH PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH

2019· dissertation· en· W3025738679 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cassidy Glennie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticipatory action researchCitizen journalismAction (physics)Action researchGender studiesPsychologySociologyPolitical sciencePedagogyAnthropologyPhysicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, entertainment media have reproduced inaccurate and stereotypical media representations of Indigenous peoples. In this thesis, I draw on concepts such as Stuart Hall’s theory of media influence, Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of symbolic violence, George Gerbner and Gaye Tuchman’s ideas of symbolic annihilation in order to analyze how media representations of Indigenous women and girls perpetuate stereotypes, and how alternative media productions might counter them. Using ethnographic and participatory action research (PAR) methodologies, I then explore these issues using empirical material. First, I conduct an Ethnographic Content Analysis (ECA) to reveal how Indigenous women and girls are represented in music videos, identifying patterns along themes of beauty standards, stereotypes, and power and agency. Second, I explore how Inuit girls self-represented when given access to resources. To do this, I collaborated with local Indigenous organizations in Rankin Inlet, Nunavut, to facilitate a three-day music video camp for Inuit girls. A year later, following PAR principles, I involved the girls in the data analysis process; themes in the girls’ videos included friendship, connection to nature, Inuit culture and the importance of positive representation. Overall, this thesis provided an opportunity for raising awareness among the Inuit girls that by making their own media, they have the power to create their own self-representations and resist stereotypes. In this way, girl-led self-representations have the potential to change lives and communities.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.008
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.353
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.166 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same topicSocial Media and Politics→French-language works237,207→