Belonging, occupation, and human well-being: An exploration
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Researchers identify the importance of belonging to human well-being and provide evidence-based support for occupation as a medium for expressing and achieving a sense of belonging and connectedness. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to highlight the imperative for occupational therapy theory and practice to address occupations concerned with belonging needs. KEY ISSUES: Dominant occupational therapy models emphasise doing self-care, productive, and leisure occupations, thereby ignoring occupations undertaken to contribute to the well-being of others, occupations that foster connections to nature and ancestors, collaborative occupations, and those valued for their social context and potential to strengthen social roles. IMPLICATIONS: Belonging, connectedness, and interdependence are positively correlated with human well-being, are prioritized by the majority of the world's people, and inform the meanings attributed to and derived from the occupations of culturally diverse people. If occupational therapy is to address meaningful occupations, attention should be paid to occupations concerned with belonging, connecting, and contributing to others.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it