MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963897488 · doi:10.1177/1609406919858530

“A Space Where People Get It”: A Methodological Reflection of Arts-Informed Community-Based Participatory Research With Nonbinary Youth

2019· article· en· W2963897488 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ellis Furman, Amandeep K. Singh, Ciann Wilson, Fil D’Alessandro, Zev Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMcGill UniversityWilfrid Laurier University
FundersWilfrid Laurier University
KeywordsParticipatory action researchThe artsCommunity-based participatory researchIdentity (music)SociologyCitizen journalismSpace (punctuation)Qualitative researchParticipant observationPsychologyPublic relationsSocial scienceVisual artsPolitical scienceComputer scienceAestheticsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is a methodological reflection of Bye Bye Binary, a community-based participatory research project (CBPR) that explored nonbinary youths’ experiences of identity development, engagement in activism, discrimination, and mental health in Ontario, Canada. The arts-informed method of body mapping was employed in a workshop format to garner the experiences of 10 nonbinary youth (aged 16–25), in conjunction with additional qualitative methods (i.e., individual interviews and reflective notes). Findings suggest that the body-mapping workshop fostered a safe environment that promoted idea generation, affirmation, self-exploration, and connections through a shared identity, thus creating “a space where people get it.” Methodological challenges that arose throughout the process are discussed, including engagement in art as “awkward,” barriers of limited time and funding, participant recruitment, and collaboration and integration. Lastly, the authors reflect on their learnings engaging in CBPR and provide insights into how researchers can move forward and apply these methods and processes into their own work engaging in arts-informed research or with nonbinary individuals.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.167
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.105
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.167
Threshold uncertainty score0.881

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1670.105
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0390.050
Scholarly communication0.0160.008
Open science0.0060.025
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.983
GPT teacher head0.821
Teacher spread0.162 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Qualitative MethodsSame topicParticipatory Visual Research MethodsFrench-language works237,207