MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1812821202 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs23/420117760

MYTHOLOGIZING ASPERGER SYNDROME: EXPLORING IMPACTS ON SOCIAL JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN IN OUT-OF-HOME CARE

2011· article· en· W1812821202 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Irene Stevens

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForegroundingAsperger syndromePsychologyCritical discourse analysisAutismAffect (linguistics)Economic JusticeDevelopmental psychologySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the majority of children affected by autistic spectrum disorders (ASD) remain at home and within their communities, a minority are so badly affected that they require out-of-home care. This article draws on some of the findings of the author’s doctoral thesis. Social justice discourse and critical disability studies have alerted researchers to the foregrounding of privileged ideas in society. For this study, texts were analyzed using ideas from Foucault and Critical Discourse Analysis. Textual analysis revealed that the discourse of Asperger Syndrome comprises an association with high intelligence, special talents (especially in maths or computing) and possibly with genius. There is also a prevailing belief within the discourse of Asperger Syndrome that it is a “mild disorder”. The voices of children who are seriously affected by Asperger Syndrome, to the extent that they may need out-of-home care, are absent. A field study that examined the views of potential and newly recruited child care practitioners demonstrated the ways in that incomplete messages from the discourse of Asperger Syndrome can affect practice.

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)0.005
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.026
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207