Teddy bears, flowers and crucifixes: Collective responses to trauma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Previously, expression of grief and trauma were circumscribed to the individual's realm of expression. More recent instances of collective trauma have given individuals and communities the opportunity to express their individual grief collectively even when they are not directly affected by a traumatic event. They do so by creating public memorials where they deposit teddy bears, flowers and crucifixes at the place where the traumatic event took place. This paper explores the rituals of building these public spiritual shrines that demonstrate a collective response to individual trauma. It also explores instances of collective trauma in order to seek an understanding of the dynamic and meaning of collective response to trauma. Experiences such as the containment of grief, post-traumatic growth, the society stock of knowledge to explain traumatic events, and implications for the mental health field are analysed. Teddy bears, flowers and crucifixes represent forms of empathy and compassion that go beyond racial, ethnic and religious boundaries, where the stereotype of the other remains frozen and a new humanity through collective shared suffering is made possible.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".