Taking a leap of faith: Meaningful participation of people with experiences of homelessness in solutions to address homelessness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Participation of people with experiences of homelessness is critical to the development of meaningful strategies to end homelessness. The purpose of this study was to gain insights from people who have been homeless in a mid-sized Canadian city, as to strategies that facilitate meaningful participation in solutions to end homelessness. Within an overarching framework of collaborative research, we collected data through seven focus groups and employed interpretive description as our approach to data analysis. In our analysis, we identified both exclusionary and inclusionary forces that impact participation. Exclusionary forces included being ‘caught in the homelessness industry’, ‘homelessness is a full time job’ and facing stigma/discrimination that make participation a ‘leap of faith’. Inclusionary forces included earning respect and building trust to address unequal power relations, and restoring often ‘taken for granted’ social relations. Specific strategies to enhance participation include listening, valuing skills and stories, and supporting advocacy efforts. The study findings illuminate ways in which power imbalances are lived out in the daily lives of people who experience homelessness, as well as mitigating forces that provide direction as to strategies for addressing power inequities that seek to make participation and social inclusion meaningful.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".