PAINTING PICTURES: TOWARDS CONNECTING THROUGH IMAGERY IN DIALOGUES WITH YOUNG PEOPLE WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY
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
The authors discuss pivotal themes in the use of imagery (visual and verbal) as a method to engage in dialogue with young people with intellectual disability (ID). In their discussion they reflect on co-occurring changes in Dutch society, the nature of caregiving, and the increasing appeals for empowerment for and by people with ID. A critical dialogue is used to analyse experiences with imagery from their previous research, and the possibilities imagery harbours to improve dialogues on quality of life with young people with ID. Through analysis of the critical dialogue, five themes were identified: leitmotiv, ambiguity, choice, revelation, and distance. To conclude, the authors discuss why family members and professional support workers should consider using imagery as a productive methodology.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| 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 it