The cognitive process of identity reconstruction after the onset of a neurological disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Rehabilitation professionals and researchers underscore the impact of an acquired disability on identity. However, the cognitive process by which identity is transformed is understudied. The present study aims to explore the cognitive process by which personal identity is reconstructed following disability onset. Methods: A template organizing style of interpretation was used to perform a qualitative analysis based on the Cognitive-Developmental Model of Social Identity Integration (CDMSII) using interview data from 10 participants with traumatic brain injury or traumatic spinal cord injury. Results: As suggested by the CDMSII, following the accident, participants initially tend to emphasize distinctions between their pre- and post-injury conditions. Eventually, individuals are able to create cognitive connections between pre-injury self-knowledge and how they understand their new condition. Finally, in the last stage of the identity integration process, the various identity components are recognized as part of the self. Organizing data based on the three stages of this theory was found to resonate with participants and aided the comprehension of how every stage in the identity reconstruction process is intertwined with the need for continuity through life. Conclusions: The CDMSII offers a useful heuristic for understanding long-term identity reconstruction and the present research emphasizes the importance of a sense of continuity following disability onset. Implications for RehabilitationA central concern in the adjustment process following disability onset is identity reconstruction. The Cognitive-Developmental Model of Social Identity Integration is useful to understand this process.This study highlights the importance of a sense of continuity throughout the identity reconstruction process following disability onset.Therapists should first help to identify core pre-injury identity characteristics in order to sustain a sense of continuity. Subsequently, the patient can be helped with the creation of meaningful links between significant pre-injury characteristics and the post-injury circumstances.The process of identity reconstruction following disability onset spans many years, therapists need to address this issue in a long-term perspective.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".