MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391529252 · doi:10.1080/19361653.2024.2309522

They don’t owe you their story: conceptualizing racialized queer care through protective spaces

2024· article· en· W4391529252 on OpenAlex
Christina B. Arayata, Vanessa Vigneswaramoorthy

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of LGBT Youth · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerGender studiesSociologyHeteronormativityHomosexuality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guided by a love politic and centrifugal intersectionality we demonstrate how whiteness, homonormative whiteness, and white heteronormativity alienates racialized queer students in both 2SLGBTQ + and racialized counterspaces within the university. The tensions experienced by racialized queer students, do not stem from the existence of these spaces, rather they are rooted within institutional notions of diversity. It is through this examination that we present our conceptualization of protective space. Protective space builds from the reconceptualization of safe spaces as defined by the Roestone Collective. Protective spaces are rooted in a love politic and involves moving forward from guilt to meaningful action embedded in accountability to create love-centered solutions. These principles can be used in both individual action and collective organizing. The conceptualization mainly builds on the experiences of sexually diverse identities; therefore, we encourage researchers and practitioners to expand and build upon this work.

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.

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 score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.315 · 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