MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312252025 · doi:10.7202/1087621ar

Constructions of Deafness: Exploring Normalcyand Deviance within Specific Social Representations

2009· article· en· W4312252025 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thomas P. Horejes

Bibliographic record

VenueDéveloppement Humain Handicap et Changement Social · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeviance (statistics)IdeologySociologySociolinguistics of sign languagesSocial controlOppressionSign languageGender studiesSocial stratificationSocial psychologyStructural inequalitySocial inequalityPoliticsPsychologyInequalitySocial scienceLinguisticsPolitical scienceManually coded languageLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The constructions of deafness and social representations of a deaf child are very complicated and deeply contested. This paper examines the constructions of deafness and how it has been sociohistorically framed and re-framed within the parameters of normalcy and deviance. Such analysis may offer insight on the potential impact of shaping ideology, politics, and what it means to be deaf. This level of analysis is conducted via an examination of the socio-history of deaf education including discussions of the ongoing “paradigm wars” between certain social control institutions, mainly American Sign Language-based (or called English-based) and the oral-based educational institutions and its implications of language. Examining these two social control institutions will seek to uncover certain constructions within specific social representations and societal dynamics that may shape the deaf child’s identity, its version of “natural” gifts, social inequality, and ultimately the types of ideologies constructed toward deaf students. A possible alternative view of reapproprating of the corporeal differences of deafness is discussed including positive strategies to minimize reproduced social stratification, oppression, social inequality, and divisions when dealing with deafness.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.866
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDéveloppement Humain Handicap et Changement SocialSame topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207