The social construction of ethnicity and masculinity of African American college men.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to understand how African American college men construct masculine and ethnic notions of their identities, despite disproportionate social obstacles and hegemonic stereotypes. The primary research question of this study was, “how might African American undergraduate males understand and develop healthy concepts of their ethnic and masculine identities at a predominately White public institution?” The following research questions guided this study: (1) how do African American college men characterize their ethnic identity; (2) how do African American college men characterize their perception of their masculinity; (3) how do African American college men perceive their performance of masculinit(ies); (4) how do the ethnic and masculine identities of African American college men intersect?; and (5) how does being in college impact African American men’s identities? Critical race theory and methodology provided a conceptual framework for exploring and analyzing counterstories about the experiences of African American college men at a large research university in the Southeastern United States. In-depth, semi-structured interviewing served as the primary data collect source. Participants’ in-depth interviews formed counterstories of how nine African American college men made meaning of perceptions of their ethnic and masculine identities. Interpretation of their stories structured the data into four major themed categories: (1) dimensions of race and ethnicity; (2) dimensions of masculinity and manhood; (3) intersection of ethnicity and masculinity; and (4) college networks and relationships. The findings revealed that the African American college men involved in this study characterized ethnicity as the cultural expression of their identity and affirmed by the commonality of their African American heritage and culture. Race was characterized by the negative racial stereotypes ascribed to African American people, but particularly negative stereotypes attributed to African American men. Participants’ dimensions of race and ethnicity were based upon cultural characteristics of their physical environment and varied by rural, suburban, and urban communities. Participants described using ‘code switching’ as a strategy to establish relationships as well as to gain access within a predominately White society. Dimensions of masculinity and manhood were based upon traditional performances of masculinity and participants described their perception of manhood as a developmental process. The counterstories of participants’ perception of masculinity included, “Handling your business” as responsible Black men, dismantling hegemonic stereotypes of unemotional men by being “emotionally strong.” Faith, values, and respect emerged as cultural beliefs and characteristics of their African American background. For participants at the intersection of ethnicity and
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".