Embodied Subjectivities: Intersections of Discursive and Critical Psychology With Socio-Cultural Exercise Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been a longstanding divide between the sociology and psychology of exercise despite common interests in individual subjectivity and identity construction through exercise practices. In this paper, I aim to find possible intersections for the two disciplines by using theoretical insights from discursive and critical psychology as well as sociocultural research on embodied experiences in exercise. Drawing from both psychological and sociocultural research on exercising bodies, I problematize different conceptualizations of subjectivity, identity, and power relations to critically examine interconnections between these different research traditions. I also highlight some of their theoretical limitations to suggest further theoretical readings that might enhance interdisciplinary analyses of change emanating from the microlevel of individual actions by both psychological and sociocultural research on the physically active body.
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 | 0.034 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.166 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".