Not remembering as a practical epistemic resource in couples therapy
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examine how displays of not remembering are used as an interactional resource in couples therapy. Our study contributes to the understanding of the social epistemology of memory; that is, how displays of not remembering relate to issues of knowledge and how they are assessed and understood with respect to the local interactional projects made relevant in therapy. From our analysis of transcribed audio- and video-taped couples therapy sessions, we found that clients’ displays of not remembering opened up a range of practical epistemic and rhetorical issues: 1) it enabled the creation of new ‘participation frameworks’ in which the client’s spouse could display first-hand knowledge; 2) it made relevant issues of accountability and blame for not having remembered important relationship events; 3) it indexed an avoidance or resistance of conforming to the therapeutic agenda; and 4) it deflected against the interpretation that one may have a certain interest in not remembering.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it