MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247266709 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14651994.v1

It's the colour of my skin: race and beauty discourse with Fenty beauty captions and user comments on Instagram

2021· preprint· en· W4247266709 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Boodram

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Gender, and Advertising
Canadian institutionsProfessional Engineers OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeautyHegemonyIdentity (music)Race (biology)NarrativeConsumption (sociology)AestheticsRepresentation (politics)Selection (genetic algorithm)SociologyArtGender studiesPolitical scienceComputer scienceLiteratureArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People of colour have long endured a lack of makeup products formulated for melanated skin. In 2017, Fenty Beauty released 40 shades of its foundation and concealer products and expanded its selection in 2019 to match 50 distinct skin tones. These events inspired a new industry standard, labelled “The Fenty Effect”, that prompted other makeup brands to practice greater inclusivity toward darker skin tones. This Major Research Paper (MRP) uses a narrative approach to examine discourses around race and beauty. With a theoretical perspective on power and hegemony, it interprets the intersections of representation, colourism, identity, consumption, and counterpublics through an analysis of Fenty Beauty captions and user comments on Instagram. The results of this study provide preliminary knowledge toward a larger investigation on the shift in racial representations in the beauty industry. Keywords: race; representation; colourism; beauty; social media; identity; consumption

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedia, Gender, and AdvertisingFrench-language works237,207