MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4229926058 · doi:10.4324/9780203044070-47

Conclusion

2013· book-chapter· en· W4229926058 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Timothy J. L. Chandler, John Nauright

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In compiling and editing this set of essays, we have tried to do four things. First we have sought to add to historical analysis of gender in sport by concentrating on rugby football which, historically, has been viewed as one of the most masculine and manly sports - particularly in the British Isles and the settler empire. In selecting this (and the other three themes) we have inevitably chosen not to address other issues and questions that are also important. For example, in relation to the issue of gender, we have not asked questions relating to women&s;s rugby such as &s;What does women playing this highly masculine team game mean?&s; Our silence on this should not be taken to mean that we see women&s;s rugby as unimportant or that we have concluded that women&s;s rugby is purely a novelty. The same should be said of our selectivity in terms of culture and country. We certainly do not dismiss rugby in France, Argentina, Canada, the Pacific Islands, Romania or elsewhere as unimportant, any more than our selection of men&s;s rugby is dismissive of the women&s;s game. Indeed most of these contexts are examined in our companion volume The Rugby World. In many of the countries we analyse here, women&s;s rugby is a very recent phenomenon, largely because of male resistance against women playing such a &s;manly&s; game. In New Zealand and Australia, for example, women&s;s rugby clubs are generally tied to male unions and clubs. Women&s;s teams are generally coached by males and tend to have their schedules set around the men&s;s in order to ensure access to facilities. This fact suggests the continued marginalization of women and promotes continued male hegemony. We have chosen to look at this and other associated questions through the lenses of nationalism, sexuality, homophobia and even homoeroticism. Thus in addressing the marginalization issue, David Andrews suggests that in Wales, where rugby is a huge part of the national identity and culture, women have indeed been marginalized in the past because of the patriarchal ideologies at work within the nation. We suggest that if men and women are viewed relationally rather than opposition ally, then it is possible to draw some conclusions about women from many of these discussions of men&s;s rugby. This does not mean that analysis of women&s;s rugby is unnecessary; indeed it is time for major work to be done in this area.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0940.044

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSports, Gender, and Society→French-language works237,207→