MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123652652 · doi:10.1080/14616734.2011.584410

“Not just a dog”: an attachment perspective on relationships with assistance dogs

2011· article· en· W2123652652 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

VenueAttachment & Human Development · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGriefPsychologyAttachment theoryPerspective (graphical)Thematic analysisSafe havenDevelopmental psychologyTraumatic griefAnxietySocial psychologyQualitative researchPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We explored individuals' relationships with an assistance dog from an attachment-theory perspective. We used both inductive and deductive thematic methods to analyze semi-structured interviews with 25 participants who had lost an assistance dog to retirement or death. Analyses revealed attachment processes of safe haven, secure base, and separation anxiety. Although attachment dynamics were an important feature of these relationships, caregiving was equally important. When confronted with the loss of their dog, almost all participants experienced intense grief. Most grief responses were consistent with the loss of a caregiving relationship. Findings suggest that grief is a natural response to the loss of a beloved companion who fulfilled fundamental needs for attachment and caregiving.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.293 · 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