Relational citizenship: supporting embodied selfhood and relationality in dementia care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We draw on findings from a mixed-method study of specialised red-nosed elder-clowns in a long-term care facility to advance a model of 'relational citizenship' for individuals with dementia. Relational citizenship foregrounds the reciprocal nature of engagement and the centrality of capacities, senses, and experiences of bodies to the exercise of human agency and interconnectedness. We critically examine elder-clown strategies and techniques to illustrate how relational citizenship can be supported and undermined at the micro level of direct care through a focus on embodied expressions of creativity and sexuality. We identify links between aesthetic enrichment and relational practices in art, music and imagination. Relational citizenship offers an important rethinking of notions of selfhood, entitlement, and reciprocity that are central to a sociology of dementia, and it also provides new ethical grounds to explore how residents' creative and sexual expression can be cultivated in the context of long-term care.
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".