“The older staff, myself included, we were pretty institutionalized ourselves”: Authority and Insight in Practitioner Narratives of Psychiatric Deinstitutionalization in Prairie Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the early 1960s, Canada's provinces began radically to reduce the in-patient populations of their psychiatric services. This was part of a wider project of trans-institutionalization through which vulnerable people and those who cared for them were shifted across institutional contexts within Canada's evolving welfare state apparatus. This article draws on interviews with Psychiatric Nurses who worked through the transformative mental health reforms of the 1960s and 1970s, and it makes a case for practitioner history. Practitioner narratives offer a window on the vital tensions between the manifest and the latent functions of welfare institutions, between the impulse to support and the impulse to control, and between paternalism and respect for the rights of the mentally ill. It draws upon the authority of practitioners who, retrospectively, have gained insight into their involvement with prior regimes of caring and control and have come to discern institutional logics previously so hegemonic as to have been largely invisible to them.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.059 | 0.082 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".