MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3027968264 · doi:10.1177/1462474520925159

“Discipline that hurts”: Punitive logics and governance in sport

2020· article· en· W3027968264 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

VenuePunishment & Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDoping in Sports
Canadian institutionsThe King's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPunitive damagesLeagueHarmIce hockeyCorporate governancePunishment (psychology)CriminologyPolitical scienceEconomic JusticeSociologySocial psychologyPsychologyLawEconomicsMedicineManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we undertake a case study of the National Hockey League’s supplementary discipline regime to reflect on the ways in which discourses about social harm are configured, taken up and used in the sporting landscape and how they reflect and reify narrow understandings of crime and punishment. We find that the hockey world employs predictable crime and justice metaphors when discussing on-ice violence and suggest this breeds fear and legitimates governance strategies. The National Hockey League’s supplemental discipline process itself—much like penality away from the rink—is characterized by multiple, sometimes contradictory, objectives. Notably, the league responsibilizes players, long endorsing or accepting vigilantism, refusing to enact structural changes, and compelling players themselves to create a safe workplace. This regime has contributed to financial struggles, chronic physical and mental health issues, and the early deaths of a host of former players.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.519

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.261 · 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