MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327732007 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v13n5p67

Racial and Gender Discrimination Reflected in Theodore Melfi’s Hidden Figures

2023· article· en· W4327732007 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Irwan Sumarsono, Perwi Darmajanti, Chatarini Septi Ngudi Lestari, Urip Zaenal Fanani, Ina Ika Pratita, Suprihatien Suprihatien, Parastuti Parastuti, Raden Roro Dyah Woroharsi Parnaningroem, Nise Samudra Sasanti, Yovinza Bethvine Sopaheluwakan

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSouth Asian Cinema and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrejudice (legal term)Opposition (politics)Race (biology)White (mutation)Gender studiesRacismSociologyTone (literature)PsychologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceArtLawPoliticsLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The United States of America has a long history of discrimination based on race and gender. People were divided according to their race, religion, and skin tone. Both black males and their white partners discriminated against African American women. The application of Jim Crow Laws worsened their situation. Both individual and institutional discrimination had to be endured by them. Uncovering the racial and gender inequality faced by African American women is one of the themes explored in Theodore Melfi's Hidden Figure. The study's goals were to look at the fight for equality as a response to the prejudice towards people of color and women that three important female characters in Theodore Melfi's movie Hidden Figures experienced. A book by Margot Lee Shetterly served as the inspiration for the movie. The writers employed sociological, historical, and descriptive analytic methods to analyze this research. Through conducting library research, data was acquired. The main information was taken directly from the film, while the supporting information was gathered from books, magazines, and other sources related to English literature. The collected data were organized and evaluated before being used in the article. This research made it clear to the writers that the movie expressed opposition to discrimination against African American women. The three female protagonists of the movie experienced a variety of sorts of prejudice from their society, both at home and at work. The protagonists struggled with having to create their identities to be accepted by their society, especially by their coworkers at their place of employment who treat them equally and without any discrimination. They eventually won the right to be treated equally and were freed from various types of bias after considerable struggle and self-justification.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.228
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicSouth Asian Cinema and CultureFrench-language works237,207