Re/developing Models for Understanding Sexuality with Disability within Rehabilitation Counselling
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human sexuality is constructed via public, interactional and private sexual scripts (Simon & Gagnon, 1986, 1987, 2003). However, normative sexual scripts often exclude or asexualize people with cerebral palsy. Consequently, rehabilitation counselling may rely on conceptual models of sexuality which are derived from typical populations. This paper presents a conceptual model of sexuality with disability relevant to rehabilitation counselling which reflects how people with moderate to severe disability construct their sexuality. Based on a hermeneutic phenomenological framework, seven in-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with five men and two women with moderate to severe cerebral palsy from Canada and Australia. Interviews were analyzed using Nvivo 9. Overall, the results and proposed model indicate that while interactional, public and private sexual scripts feature in all participants' descriptions of their sexuality, interactional sexual scripts dominated participant's definition of their sexuality. Rehabilitation counselling frameworks should be cognizant of the primary importance of interactional sexual experiences within their clients' lives.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it