MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092811716

Stigma, Discrimination & Marginalization: Gateways to Oppression of Persons with Disabilities in Ghana, West Africa

2013· article· en· W3092811716 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Baffoe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Social Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionStigma (botany)LimitingPerceptionSocial exclusionEconomic growthSociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyPoliticsLawPsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disability can be socially constructed through the actions of society in erecting barriers and structures that limit the ability of certain persons in society to function “normally”. Such barriers also limit the ability of such persons to access the opportunities, privileges and resources in society. This study examines the societal perceptions about persons with disabilities in Ghana, which cast them as needy, feeble and “abnormal” persons. These perceptions have the effect of limiting their access to resources in society. The situation is even harder for children with disabilities who are denied the opportunity and prospects of inclusive education. The study draws on the perspectives from persons with disabilities themselves, educators, community members, and social workers in Ghana, West Africa. It provides recommendations on the need to recognize and remove the societal barriers that prevent persons with disabilities from functioning as “normal” members of society with the same rights as other citizens.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.302 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations109
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Social ResearchSame topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207