MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003151656 · doi:10.1002/jhbs.10130

The modern confessional: Anglo‐American religious groups and the emergence of lay psychotherapy1

2003· article· en· W2003151656 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alison Falby

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReligious Studies and Spiritual Practices
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfessionalSecularizationConfession (law)IndividualismPower (physics)Religious studiesSociologySacrificePeriod (music)Gender studiesPsychoanalysisPolitical scienceAestheticsPsychologyPhilosophyTheologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reconceives of secularization as a gradual process of increasing interaction between the (social) scientific and spiritual realms by examining the influence of Christian ideas of group confession on lay psychotherapeutic groups in Britain, Canada, and the U.S. in the early twentieth century. This article focuses on three religious group leaders of the interwar period: Frank Buchman (1878-1961), Gerald Heard (1889-1971), and Henry Burton Sharman (1865-1953). Influenced by Natural Theology and the holiness movement, they placed sin and its redemption within the world, reconceiving it as psychological individualism and its redemption as self-sacrifice to the group. This reconception endorsed the moral power of groups and influenced Alcoholics Anonymous and various groups within the Human Potential Movement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.023
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the History of the Behavioral SciencesSame topicReligious Studies and Spiritual PracticesFrench-language works237,207