MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065329703 · doi:10.1080/10428232.2015.977377

Adversarial Allies: Care, Harm, and Resistance in the Helping Professions

2015· article· en· W2065329703 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Kelly, Christopher S. Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Progressive Human Services · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of OttawaWomen's and Gender Studies et Recherches Féministes
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdversarial systemHarmResistance (ecology)SolidarityPublic relationsSocial workAllianceSociologyAmbivalencePolitical scienceLawSocial psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professional encounters bestow moral esteem upon professional helpers while denigrating those who access services. Yet society is arranged in such a way that professional services are indispensable for many to survive, and service users can experience them as simultaneously helpful and oppressive. We explore the ambivalent figure of the professional “adversarial ally” working within these systems through accounts from two research studies that straddle or resist the common-sense line that separates care from harm. Professionals need to acknowledge how we are experienced as adversaries in order to better forge relationships of solidarity or “alliance” with those using social and medical services.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0280.061
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0020.014
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.470
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Progressive Human ServicesSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207