Occupation and Identity: Perspectives of Children with Disabilities and their Parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Occupational identity is an emerging construct in occupational science. To date, little research has been conducted that explores occupational identity in childhood, particularly with children with disabilities. This study undertakes research on this topic using a socio-cultural perspective. The research considers two main questions: “How is occupation implicated in the shaping of identity for children with disabilities?” and “How might a socio-cultural perspective reveal aspects of occupation and identity that are shaped by the dialectic between individual and social dimensions?” Using case study methodology, six children and their parents participated in assessment, photoelicitation interviews, and semi-structured interviews. Six core categories were identified across cases: a) Perceptions of self and other: Living with disability; b) Family identity, tradition and culture; c) Relational identity: A sense of belonging; d) Pride, success, and seeing things through; e) Growing up and keeping up; and f) Identity in the past, in the moment, and in the future. The findings reveal dimensions of identity and disability, identity as social, and identity as dynamic, which inform current conceptualizations about the relationship between occupation and identity for children with disabilities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".