MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412619847 · doi:10.53288/0441.1.17

Reflecting on the Evolution of Intersectional Game Studies

2025· book-chapter· en· W4412619847 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Christina Ganzon

Bibliographic record

VenuePunctum Books · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvolutionary biologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this interview, Nakamura reflects on her experiences writing and teaching about digital culture, games, race and gender–from her first publications in the 90s towards more contemporary work that shed light on toxic cultures, digital labor and narratives that render women of color invisible in media histories. In doing so, she provides a history of some of the earliest intersectional work in game studies and digital media. These reflections and histories told by one female scholar of color to another provide a window into the labor of intersectional work in game studies, how far we have come, and how far we have yet to go.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.046
Scholarly communication0.0120.020
Open science0.0020.013
Research integrity0.0020.007
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venuePunctum Books→Same topicDigital Games and Media→French-language works237,207→