Misrepresentation of Overall and By-Gender Mortality Causes in Film Using Online, Crowd-Sourced Data: Quantitative Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The common phrase "representation matters" asserts that media has a measurable and important impact on civic society's perception of self and others. The representation of health in media, in particular, may reflect and perpetuate a society's disease burden. Objective: In this study, for the top 10 major causes of death in the United States, we aimed to examine how cinematic representation overall and by-gender mortality diverges from reality. Methods: Using crowd-sourced data on over 68,000 film deaths from Cinemorgue Wiki, we employ natural language processing techniques to analyze shifts in representation of deaths in movies versus the 2021 National Vital Statistics Survey top 10 mortality causes. We parsed, stemmed, and classified each film death database entry, and then categorized film deaths by gender using a specifically trained gender text classifier. Results: Overall, movies strongly overrepresent suicide and, to a lesser degree, accidents. In terms of gender, movies overrepresent men and underrepresent women for nearly every major mortality cause, including heart disease and cerebrovascular disease (chi-square test, P<.001); 73.6% (477/648) of film deaths from heart disease were men (vs 384,866/695,547, 55.4% in real life) and 69.4% (50/72) of film deaths from cerebrovascular disease were men (vs 70,852/162,890, 43.5% in real life). The 2 exceptions for which women were overrepresented are suicide and accidents (chi-square test, P<.001), with 39.7% (945/2382) deaths from suicide in film being women (vs 9825/48,183, 20.4% in real life) and 38.8% (485/1250) deaths from accidents in film being women (vs 75,333/225,935, 33.5% in real life). Conclusions: We discuss the implications of under- and overrepresenting causes of death overall and by gender, as well as areas of future research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".