A Phenomenological Study of Occupational Engagement in Recovery from Mental Illness
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
BACKGROUND: Recovery from mental illness has been described as a process involving personal growth and a search for meaning. Occupation is a primary medium for human development as well as the creation of life meaning, suggesting the exploration of recovery from an occupational perspective is warranted. PURPOSE: To explore the experience and meaning of occupation for 713 people who self-identified as being in recovery from mental illness. METHODS: Recovery narratives were collected from participants in conversational interviews that were recorded and transcribed. The transcripts were analysed using hermeneutic phenomenology. FINDINGS: A range of experiences were evident in the recovery narratives, from complete disengagement to full engagement in occupations. Insights into the experience and meaning of different states of occupation were revealed. IMPLICATIONS: All forms of occupational engagement, including disengagement, can be meaningful in the recovery process. Increased understanding of different modes of occupational engagement will assist therapists to support recovery more effectively.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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