MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143091694 · doi:10.1353/aad.2012.0201

Integrated Perspective of Evolving Intrapsychic and Person-Environment Functions: Implications for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Individuals

2002· article· en· W2143091694 on OpenAlexaff
Vivienne Jung, Robert H. Short

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican annals of the deaf · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySocioemotional selectivity theoryPsychological interventionFeelingPsychosocialPerspective (graphical)PerceptionCognitive psychologySocial connectednessTheory of mindSocial psychologySocial relationAffect (linguistics)Developmental psychologyCognitionPsychotherapistCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors review and integrate certain diverse theories to explain and suggest appropriate interventions for difficulties in socioemotional functioning experienced by many deaf persons. These diverse perspectives include a hierarchical circular systems approach, psychosocial stage theory, social learning theory, and representational models, or evolving expectancies of others. These perspectives, which can facilitate understanding of social behaviors and development and lead to improved interventions, provide background for a 3-level model proposed in the article. The model focuses on the relationship between the deaf person and the proximal social environment. The model's first level takes into account intrapsychic processes such as self-concept; the second highlights reciprocal interactions between the person and the social environment. The third describes the resulting memories and expectancies that develop and evolve and that influence the person's previous intrapsychic thoughts, feelings, and perceptions. These, in turn, affect social interactions, in a recurrent, spiraling fashion. This hierarchical model can be used as a framework for concurrent or sequential interventions with Deaf people.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican annals of the deafSame topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207