MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3210623692 · doi:10.1177/16094069211051563

Transformative Research Methods to Increase Social Impact for Vulnerable Groups and Cultural Minorities

2021· article· en· W3210623692 on OpenAlex
Donna M. Mertens

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChildren's Rights and Participation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningStatus quoSociologyIndigenousPovertySustainabilityPublic relationsPolitical sciencePedagogyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A transformative lens applied to research increases impact in the form of providing support for actions that increase social, economic, and environmental justice. Researchers who accept the role of supporting transformative change can enhance their abilities to do so through the use of a transformative lens that informs the design, implementation, and use of their research. The transformative ethical assumption informs methodological choices in that the research design consciously focuses on addressing inequities and providing a platform for transformative change. Engagement with members of marginalized and vulnerable communities is critical and needs to be approached in ways that value the knowledge they bring and addresses power inequities. Methodologies that are commensurate with a transformative approach include the use of mixed methods, viewing the role of the researcher as a social change agent, learning from social activism, and employing specific strategies for culturally responsive inclusion, addressing power differences, and planning for sustainability. Examples of research that increased social impact illustrate how these methodologies have been applied: social activism strategies to address structural racism for youth and for Black men in prison; culturally responsive strategies in research affecting members of sexual minorities in countries in which same-sex behaviors are prohibited by law and for incarcerated women; power inequities in research for people living in high poverty, including children in Nicaragua and Indigenous South Africans; and planning for sustainability with Indigenous youth in Canada and farmers in South Africa. The transformative approach to research asks researchers to critically examine their role in sustaining an oppressive status quo and to address the challenges of supporting increased justice.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.672
GPT teacher head0.732
Teacher spread0.061 · 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