The way we look: exploring visual methodologies in occupational science
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual methodologies and methods encompass the use of various types of visual materials in systematic ways to understand, explain, and/or express a phenomenon. Visual methods can add to the study of occupation in numerous ways; for example, to access tacit and taken-for-granted aspects of occupation and to enhance awareness of cultural elements of occupation. In particular, visual methodologies and methods provide a key means to enact occupational science in critically informed ways, as they can be employed to work with collectives experiencing occupational marginalization to raise awareness of injustices and engage in praxis (Asaba et al., in press; Gastaldo, Carrasco & Magalhaes 2012; Hartman et al., 2011; Park, 2012).\nThe key objectives of this institute include: a) engage in a collective dialogue to identify epistemological, ethical, and practical considerations for research that employs visual methodologies and methods; b) provoke reflexivity regarding how the ‘visual’ is understood, constructed and interpreted; c) provide hands-on experience engaging with visual materials, and working through connecting a research purpose with visual methodologies and methods; d) collectively identify future possibilities for the use of visual methodologies and methods and e) provide opportunities to network amongst scholars with interests in visual methodologies and methods.\nPart 1 of the institute will focus on epistemological, practical and ethical considerations. In order to facilitate critical reflection regarding how the ‘visual’ is understood and its potential to add to the study of occupation, 3, fifteen minute presentations will be used to illustrate epistemological, practical and ethical considerations in designing, carrying out, interpreting and disseminating such research. More specifically, examples will draw upon studies that have used body mapping to explore the impact of undocumentedness among migrant workers residing in the Great Toronto Area; Photovoice to identify and explore what supports and hinders aging processes among elder migrants in Sweden and Japan; and video and photography in ethnography for microanalysis of transformative processes that emerge in the interactions between persons and symbolic representation of embodied experiences. Following the presentations, participants will be divided into 3 small facilitated groups, with each group focused on one type of consideration (i.e., epistemological, practical, ethical). These small groups will share their lists of key considerations, and lists will be circulated to all participants who provide email contact information.\nThe second part will provide opportunities for hands-on engagement, in 1 of 3 groups. In one group, working with participants’ research ideas, facilitators will guide participants through the process of developing a rationale for using visual methods, reflecting on their epistemological perspective, and attempting to fit their research purpose and epistemological position with a methodology. In the second group, facilitators will expose participants to various ways photos can be drawn upon in research, and explore possibilities for analyses and interpretation of photographs. In the third group, participants will be lead through an approach to analysis of video and photographic material from narrative-phenomenological perspectives. The workshop will end with a discussion focused on identifying future possibilities for the use of visual methodologies and methods in occupational science.\nKey words: epistemology, ethics, reflexivity
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.
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 | 0.046 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it