MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396855575 · doi:10.26522/jess.v10i.4552

Who Watches and Follows Girls’ and Women’s Sport?

2024· article· en· W4396855575 on OpenAlex
Rachel Allison, Chris Knoester

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Emerging Sport Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsumption (sociology)IdeologyLesbianHuman sexualityFandomPsychologyGender studiesSocial psychologySociologyPoliticsPolitical scienceSocial scienceMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite high and rising consumption of women’s sport in the United States (U.S.), limited research has addressed the social factors that lead individuals to become consumers of girls’ and women’s sport. This study uses 2018-19 National Sports and Society Survey (NSASS) data to examine the frequencies and predictors of U.S. adults’ consumption of girls’ and women’s sport. We integrate social structure and life course theories to consider social structural locations, parental and own sports involvement during childhood, adult gender ideologies, and adult sport commitments as predictors of adults’ consumption of girls’ and women’s sport. The results indicate moderate consumption of female sport, with just over half of adults appearing to spend some time watching/following female sport in the last year. Also, we estimate that U.S. adults average watching/following female sport for about one hour per week, but they report that their watching/following of female sport is typically only a small fraction of their overall sport consumption. Regression findings show consistent evidence of sexuality, number of female family members, parents’ sports fandom or athleticism, childhood sports involvement, adult gender ideologies, and adult sport commitments shaping the consumption of female sport. In addition, there is some initial evidence that gender seems to encourage men to watch/follow more female sports, but women appear more prone to watch female sport as opposed to male sport. However, gender and sexuality interact with one another in predicting female sport consumption, such that gay/lesbian identities particularly heighten consumption of female sport among women. Consequently, there is evidence that lesbians are disproportionately among the most avid consumers of girls’ and women’s sport.

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)0.002
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 score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.308 · 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