MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408436709 · doi:10.3983/twc.2025.2655

"Pass it to your girlfriend!": A collaborative autoethnography of a friendship through women's sports fandom

2025· article· en· W4408436709 on OpenAlexaff
Cameron Michels, Deepa Sivarajan

Bibliographic record

VenueTransformative Works and Cultures · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFandomAutoethnographyGender studiesQueerSociologyBasketballFriendshipTransformative learningPoliticsMasculinityMedia studiesSocial sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Like broader transformative fandom, women's sports spaces are constructed as queer and feminist despite structural anti-Black racism and reinforcement of neoliberal consumerism. Being queer women's sports fans involves embracing the love of the game and many of the players while grappling with troubling politics in both the sports and their fandoms. We use collaborative autoethnography to examine our friendship as a critical feminist sports scholar and a transformative fandom member who have formed a fandom of two around our love of the National Women's Soccer League (NWSL) and Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA) in the United States, while feeling alienation from many other women's sports fans, including at live games and in women's sports real person fiction (RPF) spaces. Drawing on the works of Sara Ahmed and Rukmini Pande, a feminist/fandom killjoy approach is useful for negotiating such contradictions as fans, for cocreating fan practices together, and for articulating hopes for the future of women's sports.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.016
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransformative Works and CulturesSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207