Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Today a growing percentage of Westerners are engaged in highly subjective, non‐religiously affiliated forms of spiritual seeking. Since its early beginnings in the 1970s, New Age movement, non‐institutionally mediated forms of spirituality, moved well beyond a restricted esoteric framework into the cultural mainstream. Here, they are more broadly supported and intensified by a robust cultural ethic of individualism and religious antiauthoritarianism. Despite clear indications that this type of spirituality is a religious adaptation or innovation to the ineluctable force of late modernity, many scholars and cultural observers continue to represent it as a weak, socially insignificant form of religious expression that is contributing to a crisis of civic engagement and community mindedness through its over‐emphasis on the self and its experiences. Claims that non‐institutional, non‐dogmatic forms of religiosity promote narcissism and social alienation are scattered throughout the social scientific literature. Yet, little empirical data support these contentions. Building on studies that demonstrate a positive correlation between individualism and civic engagement, this article suggests that future research may well discover that religiously unaffiliated spirituality is in fact a socially engaged religious expression.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".