MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386004191 · doi:10.26522/jess.v8i.4354

From “Listen and Learn” to Learning to Listen Again

2023· article· en· W4386004191 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ryan Shuvera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Emerging Sport Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersU.S. Bureau of Land Management
KeywordsLeaguePledgeWhite (mutation)AllianceDiversity (politics)Political scienceIndigenousEconomic JusticePublic relationsPsychologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When support for Black Lives Matter protests grew throughout 2020, some NHL players spoke out to back the movement and joined Black-led marches across North America. “Listen and learn” became key words for white players showing support. Around the same time, Black professional hockey players created the Hockey Diversity Alliance (HDA) to push for “sustainable change” at various levels of hockey (HDA 2020). However, in October 2020, the HDA announced that it would “operate independent of the NHL” after not receiving any response to its pledge (2020). There is a collection of powerful voices in the NHL which includes players, coaches, managers, and league representatives. However, unlike the WNBA, NBA, MLB, MLS, and NFL, most players, coaches, managers, and representatives are white. As a result, it offers a sample from which to consider the responses of people who identify as white or are of white European settler descent to the calls for justice and support from Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour within and outside of hockey. The purpose of this discussion is to begin to breakdown the tangible work of responding to calls for justice for Black people in North America. Part of this process is the cataloguing of the range of responses. This paper will begin to gather, catalogue, and observe the different responses of white professional hockey players and league representatives to the work of Black Lives Matter organizations and protests and the HDA.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.263
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.312 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Emerging Sport StudiesSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207