MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4372184070 · doi:10.1145/3572334.3572396

Understanding Online Harassment and Safety Concerns of Marginalized LGBTQ+ Populations on Social Media in Bangladesh

2022· article· en· W4372184070 on OpenAlexaff
Fayika Farhat Nova, Pratyasha Saha, Shion Guha

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceSocial mediaHarassmentInternet privacySAFERIdentity (music)Presentation (obstetrics)Identity managementPublic relationsFace (sociological concept)Online identitySociologyPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologyComputer scienceComputer securityWorld Wide WebThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This note explores how various technology-mediated negative experiences and safety concerns of non-Western LGBTQ+ users, particularly from Bangladesh, hinder their continuing online interactions and self-presentation practices. Based on face-to-face and Skype semi-structured interviews (n=31), our initial results report that along with facing life-threatening harassing experiences online, Bangladeshi LGBTQ+ users also struggle with audience management and perceived privacy affordances that critically restrict their identity exploration and overall online participation, often forcing them to adopt fake/pseudo-identity online. These findings advocate for better design implications on safer social media participation, especially for LGBTQ+ users from non-Western contexts, and call for more attention to inclusive technologies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.143 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHate Speech and Cyberbullying DetectionFrench-language works237,207