Negotiation and solidarity at cultural borders in sport: A narrative inquiry into the lived experience of Deaflympians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This narrative inquiry explores structural tensions and institutional frictions that emerge at the intersection of D/deaf and disability sport, and reimagines D/deaf-affirmed narratives within sport contexts. The theoretical framework was developed through a dialogue between the concept of the “Third Space” and critical deaf studies. To inquire into the negotiation of in-between cultural spaces, we engage with the lived stories of two South Korean Deaflympians. Both have trained under the Paralympic-centered disability sport system and have worked as Adapted Physical Activity instructors at a provincial disability association. Following the narrative inquiry tradition of Clandinin and Connelly, researchers engaged in conversations with Deaf athletes and gathered materials such as official documents, media posts, and personal archives to compose field texts. We collaboratively developed timelines, summary tables, and interim research texts based on the three-dimensional narrative inquiry framework (temporality, place, and sociality), and composed the final research texts in a first-person voice. A D/deaf-affirmed hybrid identity, integrated with an athletic identity, is represented in the narratives both as a discursive sign of destabilizing stereotypical discourses and as transformative actions on audiocentric reality. The ambivalence of D/deaf vulnerability not only reveals audiocentric privilege but also creates space for interdependent care and collective responsibility. Engaging in D/deaf-affirmed praxis in sport contributes to operationalizing the intersectionality framework as one of the spokes in the wheel while also advancing axiological practices.
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 | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".