Feminist Research Ethics and First Nations Women's Life Narratives: A Conversation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay offers a reflection on conducting historical research relating to First Nations women’s lives and cross-cultural relationships in ways that are ethical and informed by feminist sensibilities. In dialogic mode, the authors work through issues and insights that have arisen in the process of researching the life story of Arrernte woman Minnie Undelya Apma, who was abducted as a child from her parents in Central Australia in 1920 by anthropologist Herbert Basedow and his wife Olive (Nell). The process of collaborative research between Kath and Victoria ignited a relationship of mutual understanding and empathy that yielded further enquiries. Fundamentally the process created a space for us to talk and think about the many ways we approach and understand the remarkable history of Minnie Apma’s life, that includes how that story is told and by whom. We argue that there are meaningful ways for First Nations and Second Peoples researchers of First Nations’ women’s life narratives to work together, that will not only improve historical scholarship, but also help to build respectful relationships that counteract inequality and ongoing disempowerment of First Nations people in our society.
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 | 0.024 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.066 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".