Surface and Depth in Sensory Ethnography: Casting Bodied Experience in an Arts-Based Interviewing Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arts-based research can provide pivotal avenues for researchers and participants to explore experiences that are difficult to put into words. Arts-based methods offer important opportunities for participants to develop reflexive understanding through material interaction with art and mark-making supplies. While sensorial and embodied experiences are entangled with arts-based methods, there is little methodological and theoretical work that puts arts-based research methods into conversation with sensory ethnography. This methods paper provides a detailed, critical reflection on the development and implementation of the sensorial arts-based exercise, Beneath the Surface, for research that examines solid-organ transplant recipients’ embodied experiences through a crip/feminist/materialist framework. Adapted from art therapy practices, Beneath the Surface generated a novel context for the articulation of embodied experience, creating space for the expression of sensations and feelings that fall outside the dominant cultural narratives of transplant, such as the “gift of life” or a “second chance,” that demand absolute gratitude. Beneath the Surface contributes to theoretical discussions surrounding embodiment, inscription, and interiority. The exercise also demands attention to ethical deliberations, highlighting the critical importance of developing trauma-informed research protocols and addressing the historically fraught relationship between critical disability studies and art therapy.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gpt | Metaresearch Domain: Methods · Genre: Methods About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Qualitative | high |
| grok | Metaresearch Domain: Methods · Genre: Methods About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Qualitative | medium |
| opus | Metaresearch Domain: Methods · Genre: Methods About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Qualitative | low |
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 | 0.073 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 3 models reading the full record.
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".