MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132923568

Run Like a Girl? That's So Gay: Exploring Homophobic and Sexist Language among Grade 7 and 8 Students in the Toronto District School Board

2015· dissertation· W7132923568 on OpenAlexaffabout
Steven Davidoff Solomon

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2015
Typedissertation
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersOffice of International Science and Engineering
KeywordsScale (ratio)Focus groupPerceptionPrejudice (legal term)HomosexualityStratified samplingGrammar school
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Homophobic name-calling abounds in schools, especially at the high school level. Driving much of this research is the negative impact of anti-gay language and epithets on lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) identified students, students with LGBT parents and guardians, and students overall. Studies in the US, UK, and Canada report regular use of phrases such as ‘that’s so gay’, ‘faggot’, and the word “gay” itself to denote something or someone with little to no value. However, a dearth of research looking at the prevalence of homophobic language at the middle school level exists. Furthermore, there is even less research looking at the relationship between homophobic and sexist language use. Using a mixed methods explanatory sequential design, this three-paper dissertation explored homophobic and sexist language use in middle school, specifically investigating, among other things, how often and under what conditions grade seven and eight students use these types of language. A stratified random sample of middle school students (n=488) completed a survey that included the Homophobic Content Agent Target Scale (HCAT). The newly developed Sexist Content Agent Target Scale (S-CAT) explored sexist language. Students reported their frequency of homophobic and sexist language use in five relationship domains including friends, strangers, and antagonists. As well, five focus groups explored more deeply students’ perceptions and understandings of homophobic and sexist language use at school. A number of important findings were produced including the prevalence of homophobic name-calling prior to high schools as well as the strong association between homophobic and sexist language use. These empirical findings join the literature that has long conceptually linked sexism and homophobia, whereby their interlocking nature manifests in name-calling experiences of middle school students. Students (boys in particular) as either agents or targets of sexist language had increased likelihood of being agents or targets of homophobic language. Given the often contentious nature of anti-homophobia education, the hesitancy of school staff to intervene regularly (even in the presence of this language), the findings presented here suggest anti-sexist education as another means to address homophobic language, thereby contributing to creating and maintaining more positive learning environment for all students.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.359 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→