Beyond Professional Affiliation: Race, Class & Gender Dynamics in Interdisciplinary Teams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This study aims to illuminate the ways that gender, race, and class are experienced and socially constructed on interdisciplinary health teams. The study involves four in-depth qualitative interviews with social workers who are employed members of interdisciplinary health teams within a medium sized city in south-western Ontario. The study documents three levels of inquiry. Initially, it explores social workers' understandings of how gender, race, and class affect interdisciplinary team dynamics. Next, a discourse analysis ofthe interviewees' accounts reveals how some conceptualizations of gender, race, and class are potentially limiting and at times reinforces the status quo. Lastly, it traces invisible relations of domination and subordination conveyed through the social organization of knowledge around interdisciplinary teams.</p> <p>The study offers insight into the ways that interdisciplinary health teams are thought to both promote and undermine cultural competency initiatives. It also reveals how gender, race, and class issues on interdisciplinary teams are conceptualized in ways that preserve the status quo. However, the study challenges the notion that education and exposure to difference and diversity alone will foster cultural competency skills. The study concludes that both cognitive and material shifts in power are necessary in order to achieve an effective redistribution ofpower within interdisciplinary teams.</p>
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.124 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".