MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132161137

Social Justice and Counselling Psychology: Recommitment Through Action

2014· article· en· W2132161137 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Barbara A. Kennedy, Nancy Arthur

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPsychologyIdentity (music)Action (physics)Social psychologyPublic relationsSociologyPsychotherapistPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, social justice has been one of the core values guiding the practice of counselling psychology. There are controversies surrounding the meaning of social justice and how it can be used to guide the roles and practices of counselling psychologists. The discussion here situates social justice as a primary value for professional identity. The article considers a definition of counselling psychology in Canada and whether or not it sufficiently supports a social justice orientation. The discussion focuses on the relationships between social and systemic influences on mental health. It also focuses on how counselling psychologists and counsellors could (a) expand their practices to address the conditions that have aversive effects, and (b) focus more on health promotion and well-being. The call for counselling psychologists and counsellors to position social justice centrally in their professional identity will require a fuller scope of practice to address social inequities and to help clients overcome barriers that persistently impact their mental health. Suggestions for recommitment to social justice are examined, with selected examples for practice, education, and research to illustrate how social justice can be strengthened through action.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.083
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0830.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0300.110
Scholarly communication0.0280.022
Open science0.0050.032
Research integrity0.0330.039
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Counselling and PsychotherapySame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207