A DIALECTICAL CONSTRUCTIVIST VIEW OF THE CREATION OF PERSONAL MEANING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A dialectical constructivist approach, based on a theory of constructive operators (TCO), is presented. This theory explains human psychological functioning as produced by dynamic syntheses of a variety of schemes, the "software," and mental "hardware" operators. In this model the activity of the subject is captured by means of such mental operations as allocation of attention to, or interruption of the application of schemes, as well as by executive processing. These all influence the probability of certain schemes being activated and synthesized in a field of internal complexity. Using this theory as a base, the process of meaning construction in therapy is described as a dialectical synthesis between two major types of processing, conceptual and experiential. These act together to constantly generate explanations of experience. Three important moments in the construction process, emotional arousal, symbolization, and reflection are discussed. Finally a therapy transcript is analyzed in terms of the TCO to illustrate the dynamic syntheses and mental operations involved in generating meaning in therapy.
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 | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.061 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".