The Indigo Project: Participatory Action Research with Gender and Sexual Minority Survivors of Elder Abuse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Though research suggests that older adults belonging to gender and sexual minorities (GSM) are at greater risk of abuse and neglect, more needs to be done to investigate this situation, provide solid data, offer support to survivors and better inform those providing services. This article reports on a participatory action research project in which nine older adults with lived experience of abuse were interviewed, as were the seniors’ programmer from our community partner organization and a trauma counsellor who supported our participants throughout the project. Participants were interviewed at least twice, often more, and the resulting interview transcripts were edited with the help and consent of the participant concerned, to form narratives which were content-analyzed.<em> </em>The goals of the project were to raise awareness of the underreported issue of abuse of elder GSM individuals, to consider how elder abuse might both differ and look the same as it does in the mainstream population, and to offer mental health supports and safe spaces for healing for our participants. This deep dive into lived experience illuminates how homophobia and transphobia (both historic and contemporary) play out in subtle and complex ways. We conclude with recommendations for researchers and care/service providers.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".