“It's Hard to See How These Would be Harmful to Kids”: Public Library Staff Perceptions of Child Development and Drag Queen Storytimes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports preliminary results of a survey of 458 US public library staff members regarding their perceptions of drag queen storytimes (DQS) and the ways in which these storytimes influence child development. The majority of respondents from libraries that have hosted at least one DQS agreed that DQS support healthy child development and positively influence children’s understanding of gender and/or sexuality, while respondents from libraries that have not hosted DQS were more likely to disagree or report being undecided. Specific ways in which respondents perceive DQS to influence child development are also analyzed. Cet article présente les résultats préliminaires d'une enquête menée auprès de 458 membres du personnel de la bibliothèque publique concernant leurs perceptions des heures du conte de drag queen (HCDQ) et la manière dont ces heures du conte influencent le développement de l'enfant. La majorité des répondants des bibliothèques qui ont hébergé au moins une HCDQ ont convenu que l'activité soutient le développement sain de l'enfant et influence positivement la compréhension des enfants du genre et/ou de la sexualité, tandis que les répondants des bibliothèques qui n'ont pas hébergé de HCDQ étaient plus susceptibles d'être en désaccord ou de déclarer être indécis. Les manières spécifiques dont les répondants perçoivent l'HCDQ comme influençant le développement de l'enfant sont également analysées.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Qualitative | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".