“Those Experiences While Good Also Made Me Feel Uncomfortable and Broken”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Until recently, there has been a dearth of information about the lived experience of individuals living with Facial Eye Disfigurement (FED). The psychosocial and psychological aspects of living with FED are expansive and touch on all aspects of self and society. People living with FED and their family members experience bullying, stares, avoidance, and often experience isolation. This chapter is an interpretive phenomenological analysis (IPA) of one 32-year-old adult male named Derek who lives in Canada. This IPA-style chapter explores Derek’s lived experience of living with FED. His voice is used verbatim as IPA espouses Derek as the expert on this topic. Derek’s transcript was read and re-read, wide margined with initial coding, in line with IPA methodology. Sub-themes and overarching themes examined focus on Derek’s use of support networks and resilience. Finally, we write about who the benefactors will be regarding this research as well as other possible areas of research to extend the psychosocial and psychological aspects of living with FED.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".