Experiencing psychiatric diagnosis: client perspectives on being named mentally ill*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article is reported result of a phenomenological study whereby privileged view was gained into the lives of persons who had experienced receiving a diagnosis which named 'severe and enduring mental illness'. Thematic analysis yielded the four essential themes of diagnosis as the experience of 'a knowledge that knows', 'destructive (gift) of difference', 'making visible the invisible' and 'making knowledge knowledgeable'. Each of the themes is discussed under its own heading in this paper as a means for describing the nature of 'experiencing psychiatric diagnosis'. Effort is made to provide glimpse into the 'lifeworld' of being diagnosed mentally ill, and the reader's attention is directed to a particular kind of power that exists in the medical language of diagnoses. Discernment is highlighted as most consequential to an 'action sensitive practice' and a case is made for care-providers in psychiatric-mental health care to be sensitized to how medical terminology is experienced and the need to strive for balance within the 'economy of power' contained in these specialized words.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".