MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411972171 · doi:10.26503/dl.v2025i2.2468

The Benefits of Banding: Overcoming Barriers to CommunityParticipation Among Magic: The Gathering Players

2025· article· en· W4411972171 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Tisi, Michael Nixon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsAmorfix (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMAGIC (telescope)Computer scienceInternet privacyComputer securityBusinessPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many game communities, including those who primarily play Magic: The Gathering (MTG), struggle with different kinds of toxicity, often directed towards players of minority gender identities. To help understand how these players deal with the barriers they face, we conducted a two-phase mixed-methods study. After surveying 324 MTG players and interviewing 14 of them, we found such players encountered barriers such as male-dominated environments, stereotyping and underestimation and developed strategies of community support, including personal adaptation based on previous systemic familiarity and alternate formats to persist and succeed. The research highlights economic barriers, cultural and social barriers, along with knowledge and experience gaps. Important themes include recognizing cultural norms, overcoming stereotyping, engaging selectively, and building inclusive playgroups, resilience and adaptability. We believe these strategies imply a broader need for intentional inclusivity practices and support mechanisms within gaming communities to foster a more equitable and representative gaming public.

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)0.015
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207