Exploring staring behaviours towards images of physically active individuals with a physical disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Having a disability is a stigmatized trait that may elicit negative behavioural reactions, such as staring, from able-bodied individuals. These behaviours often cause feelings of ostracization and social discomfort. Portraying individuals with physical disabilities as physically active may improve how able-bodied individuals perceive them. Thus, it is of interest to evaluate whether portraying oneself as physically active is an effective strategy for reducing staring behaviour towards people with physical disabilities. This study aims to characterize able-bodied adults' staring behaviour when viewing images of people with and without physical disabilities. It also aims to evaluate whether portraying a person with a disability as physically active reduces staring. Sixty-three university students (mean age=21.2±2.5;81.5% women) viewed 40 images of people with and without physical disabilities engaging or not engaging in physical activity (10 images/condition). Eye movements were recorded during each trial. A multivariate repeated-measures ANOVA was significant for dwell time, number of fixations, time until first fixation, and number of runs, F(15,48)=37.73, p
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".