Motorikens retorik : Kroppsobservationer, översättningar och faktakonstruktioner: en diskursanalys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation is a study of the discourse on children’s ability to control their body movements – the rhetoric of motorics (motor control). It takes an interest in the different practices that need to be dealt with if you would like to construct a description of bodiliness in a factual way, and it is particularly concerned with the practice of transforming observations of children’s bodiliness into literary inscriptions of motor control as well as the discursive actions that make these inscriptions credible and relevant. The study departures from a constructivist perspective and the aim of the thesis is to study how statements about motor control are possible, understandable, made relevant, and used in practice – dimensions that are believed to be connected. The data are gathered from settings that either keep or produce descriptions of children’s bodiliness. That includes journals on physical education, manuals for motorical tests, professional literatures that deal with subjects like motor control, medical records from school health care and professional statements from a child rehabilitation center. Using discourse analysis this data is studied in terms of interpretative repertoires, modalities, categorizations, representations and realities. At first focus is on the mobilization of actors and the practice of translating body knowledge into something relevant and important. After that theories and practices of observing motor control are highlighted by studying the laboratory settings, inscription devices and the professional vision of the observers. The study then moves on to the activities where the inscriptions constructed in the laboratories are mobilized to construct facts. Here the attention is placed on the practices of writing medical records and how statements about motor control are used in these types of text. Finally a reflexive move is made by comparing the rhetoric of motor control with the rhetoric used to convince the reader of this dissertation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".