Seeking alternatives in therapeutic recreation/recreation therapy: a social/recreation community model
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Controversy concerning the medical model within the therapeutic recreation (TR) community has a long history. Authors have contested the legitimacy of the medical model in TR, arguing that a social model is more suitable. In keeping with the recent call to continue conversations about re-imagining TR, the purpose of this article was to identify and describe a theoretical framework for changing the environment through recreation relationships instead of rehabilitating the person. The construction of TR’s history cannot be understood solely based on the medical model. Another history arose from a heritage social concern, later correlating with the disability rights movement. We further explored the theoretical and research evidence for a ‘contra-therapy’ understanding of TR. Belongingness was identified as a concept that articulated well with the alternative view of TR based largely on the social model. Lastly, the implications of adopting a social/recreation community model are reviewed.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it