Meaning of Staring and the Starer–Staree Relationship Related to Men Living With Acquired Spinal Cord Injuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When in public places, many individuals with physical disabilities experience staring. Although staring is typically seen as uncomplicated and something to be "ignored," it has consequences for the person being stared and the staree. Few studies have focused on staring experienced by men following spinal cord injury (SCI). Accordingly, this study explored how adult men with SCI give meaning to the staring from others, the consequences for them, and their responses to the staring and to the starer. Principles of modified grounded theory methods were used to conduct a secondary analysis of interview data for 30 male participants from a larger study of community-dwelling individuals with SCI. Themes revealed through analysis related to context-dependent meanings of staring, negative consequences of staring for some men, and positive opportunities for self-growth and interaction with the public. These findings contribute to a more complex understanding of staring and the relationship between the starer and staree in various social circumstances which can support people living with differences in their public interactions, and improve their quality of life.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".