MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2847191128 · doi:10.1177/1532708618784332

Becoming Acrobat, Becoming Academic: An Affective, Autoethnographic Inquiry Into Collective Practices of Knowing and Becoming

2018· article· en· W2847191128 on OpenAlex
Lindsay Stephens

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCulture Studies &#x2194 Critical Methodologies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoethnographyEmbodied cognitionEthnographySociologyPerforming artsAffect (linguistics)HegemonyEpistemologyKnowledge productionAestheticsPsychologyPedagogySocial scienceCommunicationVisual artsAnthropologyPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article mobilizes a Spinozo–Deleuzian understanding of affect to articulate connections between embodied sensation and academic thinking, connections which surfaced during my ethnographic and autoethnographic research as a circus performer. I argue against reifying differences between the production of knowledge and of movement, suggesting we explore similarities in the conditions of their emergence including reflection, multiplicity, and responsiveness to repetition. In so doing, I challenge hegemonic ideas about who belongs in the body of an academic; inviting us to better understand our “less-rational” and more collective selves in becoming purveyors of academic knowledge.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.097
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.190
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.097
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.389
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.165 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it