White shoes, white socks : the coach-athlete relationship in constructing masculinities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Masculinity as an element of men's identity is socially constructed and hegemonically legitimized. The literature postulates that sport is an institution, which helps reinforce and privilege a white heterosexual hegemonic form of masculinity. The primary purpose of this research was to examine the role of the male basketball coach in the construction of his athlete's masculine identity. A theoretical framework based on social construction and hegemony was used to examine the influences of power, sexuality, and race in the formation of men's masculine identity within basketball. This qualitative study which offers a unique Canadian perspective on men's university basketball highlights the relationships between various men as they sculpt their ideals of masculinity, influenced by the culture of basketball. The athletes' experiences reinforce that various hegemonic practices are played out to create a hierarchical system which distributes power and privilege to those who conform to the institutionalized ideals of masculinity. These institutionalized ideals, historically constructed by heterosexual middle-class white males who govern basketball, are symbolized through "white shoes and white socks, please." (Abstract shortened by UMI.) Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2003 .W56. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 43-01, page: 0037. Adviser: Margery Holman. Thesis (M.H.K.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2004.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".