MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056779086 · doi:10.1080/15228967.2014.868992

“Celebration” as the Spiritual Expression of Leisure and Sport: Reflections on the L’Arche Tradition and the Special Olympics

2014· article· en· W2056779086 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nick J. Watson, Catherine A. O’Keefe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Disability & Religion · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDoping in Sports
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of South AlabamaYork St John University
KeywordsPremiseContext (archaeology)Meaning (existential)ConventionEmbodied cognitionInclusion (mineral)SociologyExpression (computer science)HospitalityAestheticsGender studiesMedia studiesLawSocial sciencePolitical scienceHistoryArtEpistemologyTourismPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The provision of leisure and sport for persons with disabilities is an integral part of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006, article 30), and in turn, these activities can positively contribute to the physical, emotional and spiritual lives of those with physical and/or intellectual disabilities (Heintzman, this issue; Patterson & Pegg, 2009). Based on this premise, we argue that the activities of leisure and sport (especially the Special Olympics) offer those with disabilities in L’Arche communities—an international federation of communities founded in the mid-1960s by the French Canadian, Jean Vanier—a vehicle for spiritual expression through “celebration.” By way of interdisciplinary discussion, we explore the diverse and rich meanings of celebration within the context of leisure and sport, with specific reference to embodied experiences, such as fun, joy, belonging, festivity, laughter and play, as understood in the writings of the founder of L’Arche, Jean Vanier, the Catholic philosopher, Joseph Pieper, and scholars from a range of disciplines. In conclusion, we suggest that the experience of celebration through leisure and sport participation (especially via the Special Olympics) is an invaluable and understated source of meaning and hope for those with disabilities within L’Arche communities, and beyond.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Disability & ReligionSame topicDoping in SportsFrench-language works237,207