MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321353201 · doi:10.1353/gsr.2023.0029

Disability in German-Speaking Europe: History, Memory, Culture ed. by Linda Leskau, Tanja Nusser, and Katherine Sorrels

2023· article· en· W4321353201 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGerman Studies Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical History and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanGender studiesPopulationSociologyHistoryMedia studiesPsychologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Disability in German-Speaking Europe: History, Memory, Culture ed. by Linda Leskau, Tanja Nusser, and Katherine Sorrels Petra Watzke Disability in German-Speaking Europe: History, Memory, Culture. Edited by Linda Leskau, Tanja Nusser, and Katherine Sorrels. Rochester, NY: Camden House, 2022. Pp. 249. Hardcover $99.00. ISBN 978-1640141087. German-speaking Europe has a complicated relationship with disability. Although roughly 10–20% of the population in German-speaking countries is disabled, disabled people are often treated as an afterthought in efforts to achieve diversity, equity, and inclusivity. The lackluster media response to the murder of four disabled people by a caregiver in Potsdam in 2021 emphasizes the role that ableist attitudes play in the disdain for disabled people. Even though the general reaction to this tragic event indicates persistent prejudices about disability, attitudes are slowly changing. This change is due to general societal shifts, continued disability activism, and, at least partially, the increased presence of Disability Studies in the academic institutions of German-speaking countries, where it has grown into an established interdisciplinary method of inquiry since the early 2000s. This volume builds upon and engages with discourses of disability studies in German-speaking Europe and is overall informed by a literary and cultural studies approach to this topic. The volume traces sociocultural attempts to define, frame, and control disability from the Middle Ages to the present. The individual contributions are from scholars in Canada, Germany, and the United States and cover a wide range of academic disciplines, including history, German studies, and sociology. This interdisciplinary approach suits the complexity of the topic and allows the reader to see continuities in the conceptualization of disability in different time periods, genres, and methodologies. The individual contributions are divided into three sections that are largely informed by the methodologies of their different disciplines. The first section, "Negotiating Interpersonal Relationships: Historical Perspectives," examines the processes by which normative definitions of disability are negotiated on the individual level. The articles' subject matters range from the pre-modern to the mid-twentieth century in judicial and educational settings, and in a doctor-patient relationship. Ashley Elrod's article "Moral Madness: Representations of Prodigality, Disability, and Competence in German Legal History" uses two legal cases from the seventeenth to the early twentieth century to trace the liminal category of prodigality between impairment and moral failure. The case studies not only demonstrate changes in the categorization of disability, especially with the establishment of psychiatric and psychoanalytic professions, but also show how pre-modern attitudes stigmatizing disability as deviant survived into modern times. The unreflected stigmatization of disability is examined in the other two articles in this section. The second section, "Reckoning with the Past: Reconstruction of Memory," engages with the institutionalization, pathologization, and persecution of disabled [End Page 179] people in the first half of the twentieth century in order to demonstrate how this difficult history has been dealt with (or ignored) since. Dagmar Herzog's article, "From the Disability Murder Archive: Ernst Klee's Confrontation of the Public with Nazism's First Genocide," excels at demonstrating how traumatic past events have informed ableist attitudes throughout the twentieth century. Her article discusses the work of the journalist and disability activist Klee who, in the 1970s and 80s, uncovered extant documentation of the Nazi's eugenics program aimed at the annihilation of disabled persons, commonly referred to as the T4 program. The article emphasizes Klee's important work Euthanasie im NS-Staat: Die Vernichtung lebensunwerten Lebens for confronting the public with the Nazis' widespread euthanasia program, even though the work was dismissed by academics in its own time. Tracing Klee's research process and the narrative structure he builds around the case files he discovered, Herzog reevaluates Klee's work as an important contribution to reckoning with the past in disability activism and disability studies. The third section, "Intersections and Diversity: The Lens of Culture," includes articles by German studies scholars focused on close readings of a variety of very different texts that provide mostly intersectional approaches to disability. Waltraud Maierhofer's reading of Alissa Walter's novel about the blind Maria Theresa Paradies, entitled Am Anfang war die Nachtmusik (1992), exemplifies this. The novel is...

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.265 · 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