Biographical Collage as a Tool in Inuit Community-Based Participatory Research and Capacity Development
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
As a method in arts-based qualitative research, the collage technique has been previously utilized for data generation, elicitation, analysis, and presentation of results. Collage has also been used as a self-reflective, development exercise within community-based research due to its abstract and creative self-exploratory style. Although previously used in research with a variety of populations, there is limited evidence of applying the collage technique with First Nation, Inuit, or Métis peoples, even though many other arts-based methods, such as photovoice, have been used. This article describes the use of biographical collage as part of a community-based research project in a northern Canadian Inuit community. The technique was used as an exercise for building leadership capacity, as an elicitation technique in cross-cultural qualitative interviews, and as a decolonizing process in community-based participatory research. With the description of an in-depth example, this article showcases many benefits of using the collage technique when engaging in cross-cultural community-based research with Inuit.
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 | 0.185 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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