MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025574313 · doi:10.1002/casp.686

Tragedy and catharsis in the wake of the 911 attacks

2002· article· en· W2025574313 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community & Applied Social Psychology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLeadership, Courage, and Heroism Studies
Canadian institutionsEmergent BioSolutions (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatharsisTragedy (event)HERODemiseTerrorismPsychologyFeelingPsychological interventionSocial psychologyLearned helplessnessSociologyCriminologyPsychoanalysisLawPolitical scienceSocial scienceLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We argue that the events of 11 september 2001 (911) should be understood as a tragedy in the Greek sense of the term. Contemporary US views of tragedy typically communicate a sense that little can be done to predict or explain catastrophic events. This leads to feelings of hopelessness and helplessness. Accordingly, traditional US psychological interventions focus upon ameliorative efforts only. In Greek notions of tragedy, however, the hero(ine) has a character flaw that contributes to his/her demise. Lessons are learned, and catharsis results. From the standpoint of the US as a tragic hero, psychological interventions should be both ameliorative and preventative. We contend that this overemphasis on ameliorative work and the limited views of terrorism's root causes are counterproductive. Indeed, we recommend that individual US psychologists and the American Psychological Association leadership engage in both ameliorative efforts and broadly conceived preventative work. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.161
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it