MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316804714 · doi:10.58544/imsj.v1i1.5239

Mad Studies Genealogy and Praxis

2022· article· en· W4316804714 on OpenAlexaff
Lucy Costa, Lori E. Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Mad Studies Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisOppressionSociologyArgument (complex analysis)Economic JusticeEpistemologyVocabularyPolitical scienceLinguisticsLawPoliticsMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The opinions, writings, artwork, and cultural production of academics and non-academic mental health service users/survivors form the basis of what we have come to understand as Mad Studies. In this essay, we introduce what we mean by Mad Studies “praxis" (i.e., theory-informed action) in the hopes of clarifying the distinction between other similar frameworks doing social justice/anti-oppression work. Our argument is that Mad Studies praxis gives us a specific multi-vocal vocabulary for advancing our understanding, critical analyses, and emancipatory projects which build on the interdependence between academic and community activism. Mad Studies has a rich theoretical praxis based on its enduring historical, intellectual, and community-centered mobilisation despite criticisms and challenges.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.496
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.065 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Mad Studies JournalSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207