The Experiences of 2SLGBTQ+ Adults Labeled with Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities When Navigating Mainstream Queer Social Spaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing on interviews with 31 2SLGBTQ+ people labeled with developmental and/or intellectual disabilities, this exploratory study focuses on participants' experiences navigating mainstream queer social spaces. The current study is an explorative qualitative view at the intersection of the 2SLGBTQ+ and disability community. There is a call for more inclusive spaces for people with disabilities within queer social areas. Although queer spaces attempt to be free and inclusive, many have inaccessible activities and locations. The findings depict that individuals with lived experiences are not often represented in the 2SLGBTQ+ community due to a lack of inclusion. Participants highlighted feelings of rejection as people with disabilities were not represented in many 2SLGBTQ+ focused groups or organizations. The current paper calls attention to creating more inclusive intersectional spaces to promote inclusivity and ensure people with disabilities have the opportunity to contribute through an active role in the 2SLGBTQ+ community.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".