MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016278027 · doi:10.19043/ipdj.101.002

Disrupting dehumanising and intersecting patterns of modernity with a relational ethic of caring

2020· article· en· W3016278027 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Practice Development Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFoucault, Power, and Ethics
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity of WaterlooYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernityPsychologySocial psychologySociologyPsychoanalysisEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: This article describes two dehumanising patterns associated with modern culture and their consequences of stigma and suffering for persons living with dementia: the increasing division, judgment and exclusion of persons based on difference, disability, and undesirability; and the increasing attention to management and control, and their links with ageism, healthism and consumerism. These patterns have been established in media, policies, discourses and care practices, and have profound and harmful consequences for persons living with dementia.
\nAim: Inspired by philosophers Foster and Foucault, we examine societal patterns that intensify stigma and suffering for persons living with dementia through a critical lens. We then turn to a relational model of citizenship in order to advance an alternative care ethic. Subsequently, we provide examples for relational practices and legacies that model a relational care ethic and thereby disrupt the harmful patterns of modern culture. 
\nConclusion: This article argues that relational practices that foster relational citizenship and relational caring create a more humane world for persons living with memory loss. 
\nImplications for practice development: Longstanding concerns about stigmatising attitudes and inhumane care practices have prompted urgent calls for culture change in dementia and long-term care. Most recently, researchers and professionals have emphasised the relational nature of caring and advocate for the adoption of relational caring practices. This article critiques the harmful patterns of modern culture that threaten the quality of care and quality of life, and offers relational practice possibilities for enhancing care and life quality, and honouring the full citizenship of persons living with dementia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.271 · 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