MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402109739 · doi:10.55016/ojs/jet.v52i3.69723

“It’s Not Just a Picture When Lives are at Stake: Ethical Considerations and Photovoice Methods with Indigenous Peoples Engaged in Street Lifestyles”.

2019· article· en· W4402109739 on OpenAlex
Robert Henry, Chelsea Gabel

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of educational thought. · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoiceIndigenousSociologyEnvironmental ethicsMedia studiesGender studiesArtVisual artsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photovoice is an arts-based, participatory research method in which participants take photographs to document their understanding of the research question. It engages participants in a process of creating and sharing photographs and dialogue, supports connections with others and can be a key tool for policy change advocacy. This method has grown in popularity over the years and has been heralded as ideal for research with Indigenous communities and other marginalized populations. While photovoice offers clear benefits, little research has considered the ethical dilemmas that can arise from this method from an Indigenous specific lens. This paper describes the photovoice approach and its benefits, notably its engagement and empowerment aspects. We then explore the ethical challenges photovoice raises drawing on a recent study that investigates the ways in which Indigenous men engage in street lifestyles. We conclude by offering lessons learned to guide the work of researchers using photovoice with Indigenous peoples or other marginalized populations.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.272
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.392
GPT teacher head0.576
Teacher spread0.184 · 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