MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162374251 · doi:10.1177/0957926513508855

The ideological dilemma of subordination of self versus self-care: Identity construction of the ‘ethical social worker’

2013· article· en· W2162374251 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDiscourse & Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaDalhousie University
KeywordsIdeologySociologyIdentity (music)DilemmaSubordination (linguistics)NegotiationArgument (complex analysis)EpistemologyContext (archaeology)Social psychologyGender studiesSocial sciencePoliticsAestheticsLawPsychologyPolitical scienceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discourse analysis, while under-utilized in social work, is useful for understanding the social construction of identity as negotiated in talk with others. The article has twin aims. First, the author argues that identity is a fragmented co-construction, changing moment-to-moment in context with others. This argument is supported by analyzing an extract from a research study on ethics in social work practice, in which a practitioner struggled with an ideological dilemma. How ‘ideological dilemmas’ differ from the more commonly used notion of ‘ethical dilemmas’ in social work is addressed. The second goal is to heighten awareness of the utility of both discourse analysis and ‘ideological dilemmas’ for use as theoretical tools for social work. The particular ideological dilemma the worker had to negotiate to be seen as an ‘ethical practitioner’ was that of the subordination of the self versus self-care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.795
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.344 · 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