MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076665960 · doi:10.1080/09663690701659135

‘In a World of her Own…’: Re-presenting alienation and emotion in the lives and writings of women with autism

2007· article· en· W2076665960 on OpenAlexaff
Joyce Davidson

Bibliographic record

VenueGender Place & Culture · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismCONTESTAlienationPsychologyNarrativeMeaning (existential)Autism spectrum disorderDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapistLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The term autism derives from the Greek autos (meaning ‘self’)—it connotes separation, aloneness—and descriptions of those diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorders (ASDs) frequently suggest they are very much apart from the shared, experientially common space of others. The subjects of clinical literature are very often male children, perhaps unsurprising given the recognized need for early intervention and the fact that studies suggest four times as many boys receive an ASD diagnosis as girls. This understandable bias does, however, mean that a significant minority are often overlooked. This paper focuses on the experience of those girls and women who frequently struggle to obtain recognition and support for a predominantly male disorder. Drawing particularly on autobiographical accounts—including the narratives of Temple Grandin, Dawn Prince-Hughes and Donna Williams—the paper reveals a strongly felt need to communicate and thus connect their unusual spatial and emotional experience with others in a manner not typically associated with autism. It explores the complex challenges of ASD life-worlds, focusing in particular on the prevailing and powerful sense of alienation, and the ways in which ASD women use social and spatial strategies to cope with and contest the expectations and reactions of neuro-typical others.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations68
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGender Place & CultureSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207