Social Role Narrative of Disabled Artists and Both Their Work in General and in Relation to Science and Technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artists and the arts have many different roles in society. Artists also have various roles in relation to science and technology, ranging from being users of science and technology products to being educators for science and technologies, such as in museums. Artists are also involved in science and technology governance and ethics discussions. Disabled people are also artists and produce art, and disabled people in general and disabled artists are impacted by science and technology advancements. As such, disabled artists should also engage with science and technology, as well as contribute and influence science and technology governance, ethics discussions, and science and technology education with their work. We performed a scoping study of academic literature using the 70 databases of EBSCO-HOST and the database SCOPUS (includes Medline) to investigate the social role narrative of disabled artists and both their work in general and in relation to science and technology. Our findings suggest that disabled artists are mostly engaged in the context of becoming and being a disabled artist. Beyond the work itself, the identity issue of ‘being disabled’ was a focus of the coverage of being a disabled artist. The literature covered did not provide in-depth engagement with the social role of disabled artists, their work, and the barriers encountered, and best practices needed to fulfil the social roles found in the literature for non-disabled artists and the arts. Finally, the literature covered contained little content on the relationship of disabled artists and advancements of science and technology, such as in their role of using advancements of science and technologies for making art. No content at all was found that would link disabled artists and their work to the science and technology governance and ethics discussions, and no content linking disabled artists to being educators on science and technology issues, for example, in museums was found.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".