MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1579155433

Critiquing the "Psychiatric Paradigm" Revisited: Reflections on Feminist Interventions in Mental Health

2007· article· en· W1579155433 on OpenAlex
Marina Morrow

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueResources for feminist research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthSexual abusePsychologyDomestic violenceSociologyGender studiesCriminologyPoison controlPsychiatrySuicide preventionMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I still remember my first meeting with Jeri Wine. It was the fall of 1986 and I was visiting Toronto from the west coast. The notion of going to graduate school had just begun to take form in my mind and I was in Toronto to investigate what was reputed to be a fabulous feminist program in Community Psychology at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. In Vancouver I had recently completed a degree in Psychology and simultaneously had become involved in feminist anti-violence activism working for the WAVAW Rape Crisis Centre. The gap between what I was learning in my classes at the university and the stories I heard from women at the other end of the crisis line about their experiences of violence disturbed and troubled me. So many of these women had stories about how they had been disbelieved by mental health professionals when they had disclosed experiences of sexual and physical abuse. Others, who were clearly having reactions to the trauma they had experienced, appeared to have been misdiagnosed as mentally ill. On occasion, women had mental health problems that pre-existed experiences of violence or which made them more vulnerable to abuse. Violence was not the only thing that marked many of these women's lives - poverty and experiences of racism and homophobia were also evident. I asked myself, how could the material I was learning in my upper level psychology classes be so far removed from the actual lives and experiences of women? More specifically how could the discipline of psychology proceed as though social differences like gender, race, sexual orientation and class were inconsequential variables only mentioned occasionally or relegated to small separate sections in one or two of our psychology texts? Several distinct memories come to mind: a social psychology class where we are told that men experience more violence and crime than women and where the subject of intimate violence is never broached; a class on clinical psychology where sex and race differences related to psychiatric diagnosis are never mentioned much less interrogated for their meanings; a class on the history of psychology where Freud's sexist ideas about women's bodies and sexuality are presented as quaint and outmoded but never discussed in relation to the unwitting legacy he left regarding the massive denial of the role that childhood sexual abuse plays in the lives of women. One welcome departure from this was the lone course on the psychology of sex differences where those of us who suspected that gender, race, sexuality and social positioning were relevant to one's psychological development and one's experience of illness gathered. It was in this class that I began to suspect more ominously that the disciplines of psychiatry and psychology were not always the concerned helping professions they purported to be and were not based on objective science but rather contained deeply held biases that often led them to function in ways that perpetuated social inequity. This deepening realization caused me to abandon my original plans to become a clinical psychologist and I might well have become a full time activist and advocate for women, except for the nagging sense that crisis work, however grounded in women's experiences, would never allow the reflection required to more fully understand the complex social issues I was now grappling with. I was left searching for a graduate program that might allow for a critical discussion of the ways in which women and men's lives are not just biologically and psychologically, but also socially, determined. It was this that led me to Jeri Wine's office on that crisp fall day and it was in her office that I began to realize that there were individuals who had dedicated their lives and careers to critically appraising the ways in which the psychological professions have pathologized women. Jeri, I soon discovered, was one of those unique individuals. The first gift she gave me was to validate my disquiet concerning the disjuncture between what I had been taught in psychology at university and the experiences of women that I witnessed during my time as a rape crisis worker. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.357 · 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