MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281747544 · doi:10.1177/21674795221103410

Informing Future Paralympic Media Approaches: The Perspective of Canadian Paralympic Athletes

2022· article· en· W4281747544 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication & Sport · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAthletesReflexivityMeaning (existential)Thematic analysisPsychologyPerspective (graphical)Media coveragePower (physics)Applied psychologySociologyQualitative researchPhysical therapyMedia studiesMedicineSocial scienceComputer sciencePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Media coverage of the Paralympic Games can affect how athletes with impairment and disability sport are perceived by the public. Researchers investigating media representations of disability sport have focused on how Paralympic athletes and disability sport are represented by the media. Limited research, however, has examined how Paralympic athletes perceive these representations of themselves and the meanings they attribute to such representations. The purpose of this study was to examine how Paralympic athletes make meaning of discourses of disability within Paralympic coverage. This involved semi-structured photo-elicitation interviews with eight Canadian Paralympic athletes. A reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) was used to analyze the data utilizing Foucault's notions of discourse, power, and technologies of the self. The findings demonstrate that Paralympic athletes made meaning of the discourses of disability within Paralympic media coverage by drawing on their lived and media experiences. Athletes with more media experience articulated problematizations of dominant discourses of disability in Paralympic media coverage and engagement in technologies of the self. Knowledge generated from this study offers media personnel an informed understanding of how Paralympic athletes understand representations of disability and disability sport. This knowledge may offer insight and inform future media approaches of disability sport and the Paralympic Games.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.221 · 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