An Investigation into the Relationship between Adults’ Levels of Education-Related Epistemic Freedom and Epistemic Violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigates the relationship between epistemic freedom and epistemic violence. The problematization was based on adults. Due to adults’ responsibilities for education, the study focuses on adults’ levels of education-related epistemic freedom and epistemic violence. The research problem was analyzed with the correlational research model. The sample consists of 129 participants between 22 and 67 years. The data were collected with epistemic violence-freedom scale. The study revealed that adults’ level of accepting education-related epistemic violence and resorting to education-related epistemic violence were “moderate” and “low”, respectively, while their enjoyment of epistemic freedom in the past was between “moderate” and “high” and their tendency to education-related epistemic freedom was “high”. The authors found a significant, negative, and weak relationship between adults’ levels of “resorting to epistemic violence” and levels of “enjoyment of education-related epistemic freedom in the past” and “their tendency to education-related epistemic freedom”. The authors also observed a significant, positive, and moderate relationship between adults’ levels of “enjoyment of education-related epistemic freedom in the past” and “their tendency to education-related epistemic freedom”. The authors suggest that individuals should be provided with a freedom-based education and setting.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".