Etuaptmumk (Two-Eyed Seeing) and Ethical Space: Ways to Disrupt Health Researchers’ Colonial Attraction to a Singular Biomedical Worldview
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
Indigenous research on Turtle Island has existed for millennia, where knowledge(s) to work with the land and its inhabitants are available for next generations. These knowledge systems exist today but are rarely viewed as valid biomedical ‘facts’ and so are silenced. When Indigenous knowledge is solicited within health research, the knowledge system is predominantly an ‘add-on’ or is assimilated into Western understandings. We discuss disrupting this colonial state for nurse researchers. Two concepts rooted in Indigenous teachings and knowledges, Etuaptmumk (Two-Eyed Seeing) and Ethical Space, shed light on ways to disrupt health researchers’ attraction to a singular worldview which continue to privilege Western perspectives. Knowledge rooted in diverse knowledge systems is required to challenge colonial relations in health research and practice. A synergy between Etuaptmumk and Ethical Space can support working with both Indigenous and biomedical knowledge systems in health research and enhance reconciliation.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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