MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979858011 · doi:10.15353/cjds.v3i1.147

Ableism and Racism: Barriers in the Labour Market

2014· article· en· W1979858011 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Disability Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSociology and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbleismRacismInclusion (mineral)SociologyCompetence (human resources)Context (archaeology)PoliticsGender studiesPolitical scienceSocial psychologyLawPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the existence of legal instruments designed to protect against discrimination, people with disabilities and with a migrant background nonetheless experience significant barriers in the labour market. As a qualitative study conducted in Hamburg shows, discrimination in the labour market of a Germany embarked on a neoliberal course, rather than working through absolute exclusion, works instead through forms of “limited inclusion”. This paper discusses the extent to which, in this context, ableism and racism act as “bio-political caesuras” (Foucault 2003), although not recognisable as such, since they appear as individualised questions of efficiency, competence, motivation, and the willingness to integrate and thus become the responsibility of those affected.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.313 · 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