MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120699922 · doi:10.1177/1461444820984457

Mapping #MeToo: A synthesis review of digital feminist research across social media platforms

2021· review· en· W3120699922 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Media & Society · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScholarshipHollywoodMovement (music)Social mediaSociologyMedia studiesSocial movementDiversity (politics)Digital mediaGender studiesPolitical scienceHistoryComputer scienceAnthropologyAestheticsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A tweet by Hollywood actress Alyssa Milano using Tarana Burke’s phrase “me too” sparked a global movement. Despite the media attention #MeToo has garnered, little is known about how scholars have studied the movement. Through a synthesis review covering sources from 2006 to 2019, we learned that in this time period only 22 studies examined participation on social media such as Twitter and Facebook. We conclude that more research needs to be conducted, particularly to fill a gap in qualitative studies that directly engage individuals, to learn about their experiences with the movement. While #MeToo is a global movement, the omission of any reference to geography or a lack of geographic diversity suggests a narrow focus on scholarship based in the Global North. There is a need for more cross-cultural analysis to gain a better understanding of the movement as it evolves over time and moves into different spaces.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.324
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.146 · 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