MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132922882

Doing moral work: a critical analysis of living with HIV

2006· dissertation· W7132922882 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Robert Nicholas Travers

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2006
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFoucault, Power, and Ethics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMcMaster University
KeywordsSubjectivityMoral responsibilityEveryday lifePoliticsActive listeningMoral imperativeWork (physics)Narrative
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

HIV/AIDS emerged at a time when the nature of society was being redrawn into a broader neo-liberal political rationality, and fundamental questions about 'who is responsible for individual health' were being asked. As such, HIV/AIDS emerged within a paradigm of responsibility. This dissertation is concerned with how a broad range of neo-liberal values (including 'risk', being responsible, self-reliant, and contributing to society) impact the lives of people living with HIV (PHAs). The data for this dissertation were drawn from a larger study of PHAs in the Hamilton, Ontario region. The narratives of nineteen PHAs were used and were analyzed using Foucault's 'governmentality' theory. Utilizing the concept of 'moral work'---a general life comportment characterized by a cluster of ways of thinking, behaving and acting---this dissertation shows that the ways in which PHAs 'carry out of their lives' is intimately linked to the neo-liberal principles of individual responsibility and self-reliance. The concept of 'moral work' is used to describe the everyday health-related activities engaged in by PHAs, including being vigilant about all aspects of their health, listening to experts, and modifying their lifestyles. Then, the concept of moral work is used to describe the everyday life-related activities of PHAs, including taking responsibility for their HIV infection, protecting others from the burden of their disease, and making contributions to society. Finally, the concept of moral work is applied to the work that is done on the 'self' to be a responsible and good PHA. The implications of this moral work for subjectivity are considered.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0420.059
Scholarly communication0.0130.009
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0040.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.365 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicFoucault, Power, and EthicsFrench-language works237,207