MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995507505 · doi:10.1177/0886109912443959

Feminist Women’s Accounts of Depression

2012· article· en· W1995507505 on OpenAlex
Jenna MacKay, Alexandra Rutherford

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAffilia · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionDepression (economics)PsychologyThematic analysisConstruct (python library)Gender studiesFeminist theoryFeminismSocial psychologySociologyQualitative researchSocial sciencePoliticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feminist theorists have argued that women’s experiences of depression are intimately tied to multiple systemic factors, such as oppression and violence. Although these theories challenge the dominant paradigm, they tell little about how feminist women who have been diagnosed with depression construct their own experiences. This article reports on interviews with nine feminist women who had received a diagnosis of depression that were conducted and analyzed using thematic analysis. The participants’ understandings of depression were elicited and examined. The majority of participants constructed subjective understandings of depression that emphasized social factors, but this understanding neither mitigated their material suffering nor was entirely dismissive of biological understandings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.366 · 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