MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403449243 · doi:10.1177/10126902241274033

‘I want to change minds and destroy stereotypes’: Wheelchair motocross rider portrayals on Instagram

2024· article· en· W4403449243 on OpenAlexaff
Nikolaus A. Dean

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review for the Sociology of Sport · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAdventure Sports and Sensation Seeking
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWheelchairPsychologyAdvertisingSociologyAestheticsSocial psychologyArtComputer scienceBusinessWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores how wheelchair motocross (WCMX) riders represent themselves on the popular social media platform, Instagram. Situating this work in critical disability studies and using the method of interviews and social media post-election with 10 WCMX riders, this study highlights how WCMX riders use self-representations on Instagram to showcase their sporting identities, and at once, frame disability in affirmative ways that challenge ableism. However, findings also illuminate how some WCMX riders felt pressure to present themselves in inspiring manners. These pressures entrenched in the political economies of Instagram, as I argue, may not only affect the mental health and wellbeing of the WCMX riders, but how audiences come to understand disability. These findings highlight the complexities of self-representations on Instagram and draw attention to how social media can be a potential site of social change and a site where certain understandings of disability are (re)produced.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.014
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review for the Sociology of SportSame topicAdventure Sports and Sensation SeekingFrench-language works237,207