MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965736634 · doi:10.1177/000841740407100107

The Time of Our Lives: The Experience of Temporality in Occupation

2004· review· en· W1965736634 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Elizabeth Larson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemporalityTemporalitiesSynchronicitySituatedTime perceptionContext (archaeology)Agency (philosophy)PsychologyDuration (music)Occupational therapyCognitive psychologySocial psychologySociologyEpistemologyComputer sciencePerceptionHistoryArtificial intelligenceSocial sciencePsychoanalysisArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This paper synthesizes research and theory on aspects of activities producing variations in perceived temporality and subjective experience. SYNTHESIS: A proposed continuum of variations of six temporal experience are described: 1) protracted duration--elapsed time feels greater than actual elapsed clock time; 2) synchronicity--match of clock and perceived time; 3) compression--perceived time feels shorter than clock time; 4) flow--a sense of timelessness; 5) interstitial--perceived stoppage of clock time; and 6) temporal rupture--disruption of synchronicity of clock time. Five contextually situated steps that generate each of these temporal variations explain how these variations unfold in the experience of occupation. This synthesis is the basis for the Dynamic Occupation in Time (DOiT) Model which also incorporates the key occupational therapy concepts of human agency, personal engagement, context, and culture. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Investigating how occupations produce various temporalities and experiences will allow occupational scientists to investigate the underlying complexities of occupation-based practice. Also, by understanding more about the dynamic nature of occupations and appreciating the fluid quality of persons within their occupational context, occupational therapists can improve their design of occupation-based interventions.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.430
GPT teacher head0.576
Teacher spread0.145 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations59
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207