MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229039439 · doi:10.36315/2022inpact061

CONSEQUENCES OF IMPRESSION MANAGEMENTWHEN LOOKING GOOD ONLINE IS MORE ABOUT SADISM THAN TRUTH

2022· article· en· W4229039439 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephanie Sadownik

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological applications and trends · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)Punitive damagesTheme (computing)Social mediaPublic relationsImpression managementSociologyFocus groupQualitative researchInternet privacySocial psychologyIdentification (biology)PsychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceAestheticsLawSocial scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"This research paper addresses ethical considerations for surveillance in education and the educational policy frameworks that regulate human computer interactions of vulnerable and marginalized groups with emerging and disruptive technologies for both punitive and well-being measures. Over the span of two years, qualitative data was collected in the form of semi-structured interviews and participant background surveys and reflections on practice, provided staff perspectives and knowledge about vulnerable and marginalized populations, and technology policies related to known surveillance of staff during work hours in schools. In 1959, Goffman proposed that human beings attempt to control other’s impressions of them and that these impressions are often confined to spatially defined social establishments. As such, the concept of impression management and selective expression are the focus of this paper in an attempt to consider the how educational policy has evolved and areas of growth still needed or considered unattainable. School policies have grown to encompass the creation of safe spaces (and brave spaces) for LGBTQ2 individuals to be welcomed into the profession and community. Changes reflect gender neutral bathrooms, and the identification of pronouns on name tags, and social media where individuals are asked to identify which gender they relate to (she/hers, he/his, they/them, undeclared). However, the message of concealment is still apparent in other ways. The need to separate personal emails from work/school life correspondence is one way school districts have communicated the need to conceal identity, associations, personal interests, thoughts and emotions. Of a similar theme is the concept of responsibilization. This paper considers Karaian’s (2014) examination of responsibilization “through the lens of critical whiteness, queer, girlhood/young feminists and porn studies’ theorizations of the politics of sexual respectability and sexual subjectification” in an effort to revisit colonization present in schools, the Canadian Centre for Child Protection (2011) “Respect Yourself” campaign and the role of surveillance for keeping students safe. Results from the study indicate that seven of the eight participants in the study did not consider a person in the role of a teacher or administrator to be part of the vulnerable or marginalized population. Of the administrators polled, surveillance of colleagues (i.e. teachers) was often reported to them through students and parent reports of behaviour and included requests to IT staff for monitoring of teachers on site during work hours. IT staff also understood that policing ‘sexting’ was both difficult to do and the responsibility of teachers in the classroom."

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological applications and trendsSame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207