MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3169250914 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14647332.v1

High Notes In Hard Times: The Impact Of Ensemble Participation On The Well-Being Of 2SLGBTQ+ Musicians

2021· preprint· en· W3169250914 on OpenAlexafffund
Miranda Vivian Clayton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsQueerLesbianDemographicsChoirSpace (punctuation)SociologyGender studiesCapitalismTransgenderPsychologyPolitical sciencePedagogyPoliticsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the impact of participation in music ensembles such as band and choir on the well-being of two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other nonheterosexual and cisgender (2SLGBTQ+) identified musicians. 2SLGBTQ+ musicians with ensemble experience were asked to fill out a questionnaire on their experiences and perceived impacts of their participation. Conclusions were drawn from this data using constructivist grounded theory informed by queer anti-capitalism after responses were coded and grouped into themes for thematic analysis. This study propositions music ensemble as an informal queer space as well as differing effects as result of participation over different 2SLGBTQ+ demographics. This study concludes that music ensemble functions as a means to provide relief from capitalism as it is a place where queerness can be normalized instead of commodified.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.335 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→