The meaning of fighting and hiding for persons diagnosed with mental illness
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose/aims Canada’s first national mental health strategy requires a transformation away from a singular focus on symptom reduction towards personal recovery: supporting individuals in exercising self-determination, participating in meaningful occupations and relationships, and living satisfying and hopeful lives. The implementation of recovery-oriented care, however, faces two inter-related knowledge gaps that may be addressed by research: (1) how persons diagnosed with mental illness enact their well-being in the context of their everyday lives; and (2) how to differentiate the conceptualization of personal recovery from how it is experienced distinctively by every person. In this study, I aim to address these associated knowledge gaps by exploring what is revealed as meaningful for individuals diagnosed with mental illness in their first-person accounts of being with and being apart from others, and discussing what these accounts may add to generally understood conceptions of personal recovery such as connectedness (Leamy, Bird, Le Boutillier, Williams, & Slade, 2011).\nMethods Using a philosophical hermeneutics approach of entering into what is strange and unfamiliar in a text, and of reflecting critically on the choices made during the interpretive process itself (Davey, 2006, pp.1-36), I analyzed and interpreted the collective narrative of five adult participants diagnosed with mental illness. Their collective narrative was generated during a two-hour long focus group that took place as part of a larger participatory action research study focussed on transforming mental health services at an urban hospital towards recovery-oriented care (Park et al. 2014). During these focus groups, participants were asked to tell stories regarding an aspect of recovery (e.g. “Could you please tell us a story related to hope?”) and about significant experiences in their everyday lives (e.g. “Can you tell us about a time that stands out in your memory?”).\nResults and implications \nThe philosophical hermeneutics analysis revealed how activities, such as “fighting” and “hiding”, were modes of action that supported the participants’ well-being and empowerment. These actions reveal the agency and intentionality of the participants when negotiating being with or being apart from others. Outlining how I operationalized a philosophical hermeneutics approach, I will also discuss the implications of this hiding and fighting for widening present conceptions of what it may mean to be a “socially-occupied being” (Lawlor, 2003) and how everyday actions are modes of being to both connect to others as well as maintain what Corin (1998) called “positive withdrawal”.\nKeywords\nSociality, philosophical hermeneutics, personal recovery\nDiscussion Questions \n(1) How could current conceptions of the meaningful activities of personal recovery be widened and nuanced?\n(2) What are the uses and value of first-person perspectives? For whom? For which purposes? In which settings?\n(3) How may occupational scientists and researchers uncover and be responsive to unexpected, unacknowledged, or overlooked actions that people diagnosed with mental illness take for their well-being?
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,011 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,019 | 0,058 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,008 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,013 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».