Examining Self-Other Constructions to Advance the Social Justice Goals of Leisure Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community-based participatory research (CBPR) is used increasingly in leisure research to foster equitable relationships and social change, yet individuals who disseminate CBPR remain fraught with the challenges of upholding CBPR’s central values and principles in the daily practices of CBPR. In this analysis we examine the promises and challenges of integrating mental health ‘peer’ research participants into all phases of the CBPR process. While peers’ experiences were largely positive, reflections from team members revealed ongoing tensions in attending to power differences between academic researchers and peers - what the research team called “self-other” constructions. Our efforts to unsettle ‘self-other’ constructions built peers’ capacity and personal growth but perpetuated role distinctions, power inequalities, and tensions around structure and control. These tensions are highly instructive for leisure researchers “to reimagine leisure studies and its role in helping society understand, confront, and address complex social challenges” (Glover, 2015 Glover, T. D. (2015). Leisure research for social impact. Journal of Leisure Research, 47(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2015.11950348[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], p. 1).
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".