Developing Empathy and Embracing Multiple Ways of Knowing about Ocean Science through a Participatory Art Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ocean governance is characterised by social-ecological complexity and divergence in stakeholder values and perspectives. Meeting the challenges set out in the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development will require transdisciplinary approaches that can embrace multiple ways of knowing to develop shared understandings within interdependent communities of practice and ensure they can be applied in interventions that are adaptive, proactive, socially just, critically reflexive and fit to meet the Decade’s challenges. We present the outcomes of an innovative participatory art process, the Exquisite Corpse Project, with the aim of highlighting multiple perspectives, and developing empathy between participants. We will engage a selected group of researchers from the emerging ‘Ocean Art-Ocean Science’ community to explore the topic of marine heatwaves and their impacts based on data collected in the Northeast Pacific by Ocean Networks Canada and other sources. Through a facilitated process, participants will create three pieces of art that will build on each other and will be exchanged between participants. At the end, all created artworks will be reviewed by the full group to explore emerging insights on marine heatwaves and to surface participants’ underlying values and emotions, which is rarely done in scientific circles where the main mode of discourse employs rational dispassionate exchange. By creating a fun, emotionally-engaging process, we aim to show how the Exquisite Corpse project can strengthen interpersonal bonds, build social cohesion, create opportunities to surface people’s values and perspectives, and develop new transdisciplinary insights in a non-confrontational way. This study is part of an ongoing process exploring transdisciplinary approaches for multidirectional art-science collaborations and developing new research methods for including artistic insight and expression within the scientific discovery process. Instead of the conventional ‘outward looking’ strategy of many art-science projects translating scientific outputs to new formats, our approach is primarily ‘inward looking’. We aim to provide an opportunity for scientists to create art, thus allowing them to explore their own emotions, values and experiences through different ways of knowing.
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 | 0.074 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.046 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.033 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| 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".