MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408664114 · doi:10.1123/jege.2024-0046

“Four Asians and One American”—Import Player Discourse in North American Professional League of Legends

2025· article· en· W4408664114 on OpenAlexaff
Tian T. Sang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Electronic Gaming and Esports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeaguePolitical scienceHistoryAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The esport industry often seeks to depict itself as politically neutral, distinct from the discourses regarding race or nationality as found in traditional sports. However, Western esports in particular continue to reinforce racial dynamics that often center on Whiteness and reinforce the exclusion of people of color. The discourse surrounding migrant “import players,” within official broadcasts and online communities, poses important questions about globalized labor mobility and nationalism, paralleled in traditional sports. This project investigates broadcast and community narratives surrounding “import players” in the North American League of Legends ecosystem (also known as the League of Legends Championship Series) by examining Team Liquid’s roster through 2023 and 2024. Using the discourse of language and work ethic, the presence of Korean “imports” in the League of Legends Championship Series is emblematic of already existing techno-Orientalist anxieties of skilled, yet dehumanized Asian labor displacing the rightful positions of Western “native talent.” As seen by the addition of American player APA, Whiteness is positioned as a vital competent to success in Western League of Legends. Meanwhile, the identities of Asian diasporic players as “native talent” remain precarious and dependent on in-game success.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 venueJournal of Electronic Gaming and EsportsSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207