Occupational Identification and Assimilation of Pain Work: (Re)Conceptualizing the Experience of Pain at Work as an Embodied, Co-Constructed Process
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
This study examines how professional aerial acrobats are socialized to navigate pain as a feature of their occupational identity. Drawing from qualitative interview and arts-based elicitation data from 27 professional aerialists, this study advances organizational communication and body work scholarship by introducing the concept of pain work as a new sub-category of body work. Pain work is a communicative, embodied practice through which workers sustain, endure, and manage pain as a hallmark of occupational identification. The study theorizes a four-phase cyclical process model of pain work to illustrate how the meaning of pain is co-constructed through organizational assimilation. Images provided by participants highlight the material-symbolic interplay of d/Discourse and embodiment. We contribute to broader discussions on the commodification of body work and the need to critically analyze physical conduits of identification at work. Limitations and future directions are discussed.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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