MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4243219039 · doi:10.24124/2020/59031

The embodied experiences of alienation and opioid use : examining the body as a site of direct exchange through the double lens of theory and narrative

2020· dissertation· en· W4243219039 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarin Blawatt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionUniversity of OxfordHarvard University
KeywordsNarrativeGender studiesAlienationEmbodied cognitionMeaning (existential)MaterialismSociologyNarrative inquiryAestheticsSocial psychologyPsychologyPolitical scienceEpistemologyLiteratureLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research explores how the body is implicated in transmuting meaning for women who are substance dependent on opioids and have engaged in survival sex work. Using a hybridized application of narrative, theorizing, and interviews, this interdisciplinary thesis identifies some of the ways these women navigate the constraints of their marginalization. Eight women were interviewed on the traditional, ancestral, and unceded territory of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh Nations in Vancouver, British Columbia. The research works to acknowledge and explore how these women exist in an ‘alternate’ economy in order to obtain opioids to meet their life-needs. The employment of materialist feminist examinations of alienation and access to capital located shared experiences in the women’s narratives. Though the research did not reveal an explicit connection between the body, meaning, and sex work, there was a strong indication of meaning making through advocacy and engagement with those in similar social positions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.046
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSex work and related issues→French-language works237,207→