Du surfirm au héros sportif : une analyse par le prisme du processus d’altérisation des personnes handicapées et des sportifs de haut niveau
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À travers une série d’entretiens semi-directifs (N = 20) appuyés par des observations ethnographiques, cet article a pour objectif de souligner les similarités entre la perception des sportifs de haut niveau et la perception des personnes handicapées chez les étudiants en mobilité temporaire de l’université de Strasbourg. Ce travail démontre que ces deux populations subissent un processus d’altérisation identique qui se manifeste par l’intermédiaire de la figure du héros sportif et du « surfirm ». Cette étude se focalise sur la similarité de la figure du héros sportif et de celle du « surfirm ». Les données mettent en lumière le fait que ces étudiants, qui font partie d’une élite globalisée, partagent un socle culturel commun, expliquant ainsi cette absence de variation culturelle dans la mise en parallèle des athlètes de haut niveau et des personnes handicapées.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".