Bibliographic record
Abstract
The male youth in our study used video games to resist institutional authority, hegemonic masculinity, and femininity. Videogame play offered them a safe place to resist authority, which was often limited to small acts of adolescent defiance that could limit their future ability to engage thoughtfully and critically in the world. This resistance shaped and reinforced their identity formation and supported their resistance to traditional literacy practices they considered more feminine. Adults were absent from their play; hence they had no mentorship in critiquing the worldview presented in videogames. Key words: masculinity, identity, critical literacy, alternative literacies Dans cette etude, les garcons se sont servis de jeux video pour resister a l’autorite institutionnelle ainsi qu’a une representation hegemonique de la masculinite et de la la feminite. Ces jeux leur offraient un espace dans lequel ils pouvaient en toute securite opposer une resistance a l’autorite sous la forme de modestes gestes de defi typiques des adolescents. Ces gestes risquaient toutefois de limiter leur capacite future de s’engager dans le monde avec serieux et en faisant preuve d’un esprit critique. Cette resistance a faconne et renforce leur identite et concordait avec leur contestation des methodes de litteratie traditionnelles qu’ils consideraient comme plutot feminines. Les adultes etaient absents lors de leurs jeux ; les jeunes n’avaient donc pas de mentors pour critiquer la vision du monde presentee dans les jeux video. Mots cles : masculinite, identite, litteratie, esprit critique, litteraties alternatives.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".