MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184966359 · doi:10.22215/etd/2021-14476

Digitally Witnessing Police Brutality: Examining the Relationship Between Police Violence, Race, and Affect in the Age of Social Media

2021· dissertation· en· W3184966359 on OpenAlexaff
Monisha Logan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolice brutalityRace (biology)Affect (linguistics)NarrativeWhite (mutation)Power (physics)CriminologySightSocial mediaGender studiesSocial psychologySociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceArtLawCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Police brutality has recently become a popular topic following the summer of 2020.However, long before this time, police brutality and black trauma specifically had been explored by many others.With the emergence of social media, the exhibition of black bodies in trauma has been a sight for public gathering and debates.Previous research has shown us the inconsistencies that exist between the treatment of black and white bodies who experience violence in general.With that being said, this study aims to explore the intersections of race, police violence, and affect in the digital space.By comparatively analyzing online commentary left under two racially different cases (Philando Castile and Daniel Shaver), one will begin to understand how a victim's race influences how others affectively respond to them and their deaths.In doing this, discussions around narrative reconstruction, racial stereotypes, and the power of sound and imagery will all become relevant.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedia Influence and HealthFrench-language works237,207