MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074866791 · doi:10.1080/07481180701490578

Profiles of Posttraumatic Growth Following an Unjust Loss

2007· article· en· W2074866791 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

VenueDeath Studies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier UniversityCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosttraumatic growthMeaning (existential)Personal developmentSchema (genetic algorithms)Meaning-makingPsychologyIdentity (music)Social psychologySociologyPsychoanalysisPsychotherapistAestheticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dominant model of posttraumatic growth (PTG) suggests that growth is precipitated by significant challenges to one's identity or to core assumptions that give one's life meaning, and develops as one goes through meaning-making or schema reconstruction processes. Other perspectives suggest, however, that such growth occurs by other means. We use a numerically aided phenomenological approach to elucidate common profiles of growth in a sample of 52 adults who lost a loved one in a traumatic mine explosion 8 years earlier. Of the three clusters extracted, 1 captured the essence of the PTG model, including threat to sense of self, meaning-making, and personal growth; 1 featured an inability to find meaning and an absence of growth; and 1 featured minimal meaning threat with modest growth. Those most likely to report PTG interpreted the experience as threat to self, with growth coming from development of new self-understanding. The data suggest that a better understanding of the processes of PTG may be realized by taking a more refined approach to the assessment of loss and growth, and by drawing distinctions between personal growth and benefits.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.523

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.322 · 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