MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404315157 · doi:10.3998/circus.5705

Quand le savoir artistique se mêle au savoir scientifique: une revue de la littérature narrative sur les Arts-Based Research (ABR) et les Arts-Based Knowledge Translation (ABKT).

2024· article· fr· W4404315157 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCircus Arts Life and Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntellectual Property Law
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contexte : Les approches traditionnelles de transfert de connaissances en science se révèlent souvent inefficaces pour sensibiliser aux problèmes sociaux complexes. Une méthode émergente, les Arts-Based Knowledge Translation (ABKT), réunit chercheurs et artistes pour optimiser l’impact des recherches. Objectif : Cette revue de littérature narrative propose une synthèse, en français, des publications marquantes, principalement anglophones, sur l’ABKT et d’envisager les arts du cirque comme moyen de communication scientifique. Méthode : À la suite d’une recherche bibliographique pour un projet de doctorat, quatorze publications importantes sur l’ABR (Arts-Based Research) et l’ABKT (Arts-Based Knowledge Translation), parues entre 2008 et 2021, ont été sélectionnées en portant une attention particulière aux arts vivants dans le domaine de la santé. Résultats : Ces publications présentent les bases théoriques, la pratique, l’organisation, l’évaluation et les enjeux épistémiques des ABKT. La revue de littérature narrative présente également ces principes à travers des exemples de productions circassiennes. Les exemples incarnent les caractéristiques spécifiques des ABKT : l’interdisciplinarité entre l’art et la science, l’implication des populations concernées, la sensibilisation et la mobilisation par l’émotion, l’esthétique et le plaisir, ainsi que l’accessibilité des œuvres et de la recherche scientifique. Conclusion : Les ABKT constituent un domaine interdisciplinaire en expansion. Bien que leurs impacts et leurs mécanismes soient peu documentés, les arts du cirque offrent une voie innovante de communication scientifique. Malgré les défis dans la collaboration artiste-scientifique, encourager la recherche en français sur les ABKT, notamment dans les arts du cirque, favorise les dialogues entre chercheurs, artistes et publics diversifiés, dépassant ainsi les limites traditionnelles de la communication scientifique. Context : Traditional knowledge transfer approaches in science often prove ineffective for raising awareness of complex social issues. An emerging method, Arts-Based Knowledge Translation (ABKT), brings together scientific researchers and artists to optimize research dissemination and ensure tangible impact. Objective : This narrative literature review aims to synthesize and translate, in French, significant English-language publications on ABKT and introduce circus arts as a means of scientific communication. Method : Following a literature search for a doctoral project, fourteen key publications on Arts-Based Research (ABR) and ABKT, published between 2008 and 2021, was selected with a focus on performing arts in the health field. Results : These publications outline the theoretical foundations, practice, organization, evaluation, and epistemic issues of ABKT. This narrative review also presents these principles through examples of circus productions. The examples embody the specific characteristics of the ABKT: the interdisciplinarity between art and science, the involvement of concerned populations, the awareness and mobilization through emotion, aesthetics, and pleasure, as well as the accessibility of artworks and research. Conclusion : ABKT represent an expanding interdisciplinary field. Although their impacts and mechanisms are poorly documented, circus arts offer an innovative avenue for scientific communication. Despite challenges in artist-scientist collaboration, encouraging French-language research on ABKT, particularly in circus arts, will foster dialogue between researchers, artists, and diverse audiences, transcending traditional boundaries of scientific communication.

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 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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.015
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.441
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.006 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCircus Arts Life and SciencesSame topicIntellectual Property LawFrench-language works237,207