Gender Norms and Culture in Asian-Canadian Adolescent Boys’ Anticipating Dating Relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescent romantic experiences can have profound developmental significance and may be predictive of future romantic relationships. Despite such potential significance, little is known about the challenges that confront teenage boys when navigating dating relationships. The present study sought to understand how masculine gender norms influence boys’ attitudes and behaviors and the influence of cultural expectations as they anticipate prospective dating relationships. Focus-group discussions were held with adolescent boys ( N = 23), ranging in age from 14 to 18 years, from a multicultural Canadian city. Grounded Theory methodology was used to analyze discussion responses. The Central Category of the grounded theory was Anticipating Getting Experience in Dating , while communicating and benefiting from relationships were subcategories. Masculine Gender Norms arose as the major Contextual Category. The findings demonstrate how these boys attempted to maintain a socially approved masculine status while coincidingly struggling with confidence and the demands of this status. Contextual factors involving peer expectations, social/digital media culture, multicultural context, and parents’ expectations additionally contribute to their navigational struggles. Implications for boys’ relational development, in light of masculine gender norms, are addressed. Interventions are suggested to support boys in their development of confidence in romantic communications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".