A closer look at opportunities for blind adults: Impacts of stigmatization and ocularcentrism
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
Blind Canadians experience higher rates of unemployment, social isolation, and poverty than sighted Canadians. Examining what influences opportunities can help to identify the factors that disable blind people. During initial analysis, stigma and ocularcentrism emerged as important factors. Thus, this article examines how stigma operates culturally, socially, politically, and economically to shape opportunities among blind adults. Data were collected through in-depth, semi-structured interviews with six legally blind participants (visual acuity of 20/200 or below), aged 19–65 years. Thematic analysis was employed to understand the common and diverging narratives of participants. Within participant narratives, ocularcentrism is found to contribute to stigmatization at societal, interpersonal, and internalized levels. Opportunities are experienced within this context, and the stigmatization experienced both shaped and was shaped by participation in activities. It is imperative that a closer look is given to how stigma shapes the opportunities for blind people, so that individuals, teachers, practitioners, and policy makers can develop relevant and effective interventions and can challenge stigmatization.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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