Operationalizing positive masculinity: a theoretical synthesis and school-based framework to engage boys and young men
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scholars have consistently documented the relationship between conformity to traditional masculine norms and maladaptive psychosocial outcomes among boys and young men. Given current social commentary, including debate around 'toxic masculinity', intervention is needed to encourage boys to embody healthy expressions and identities of masculinity. Whilst new approaches grounded in positive masculinity show promise, the construct requires further definition and phenomenological clarity. Here we review divergent perspectives on positive masculinity, and forward a refined definition, specific to psychosocial health promotion among boys and young men. We then outline the theoretical basis of a positive masculinity framework to guide the content of future interventions, aiming to achieve positive identity development among boys and young men for the good of all. This framework represents a necessary unification of scholarship around male adolescent development, education and health. Future health promotion interventions may benefit from applying the framework to support a positive psychosocial trajectory among boys and young men, with a focus on connection, motivation and authenticity.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it