MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166685282 · doi:10.1177/0891241613514999

Caregivers’ Interpretations of Time and Biography

2014· article· en· W2166685282 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel Barken

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Contemporary Ethnography · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHistory, Culture, and Society
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiographySpousePsychologyQualitative researchSociologyPsychoanalysisPsychology of selfSocial psychologySocial scienceArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson’s disease is a disabling, chronic condition with an uncertain trajectory. It disrupts taken-for-granted routines and biographical expectations among sufferers and spousal caregivers alike. Biographical disruption and biographical work are guiding frameworks among researchers studying the experiences of people with chronic illness. Time is a fundamental component of biographical trajectories, but little research explicitly engages George Herbert Mead’s nonlinear theory of time to make sense of biographies. Using qualitative interviews with eight caregivers and participant observation with a Parkinson’s support group, this paper shows how Mead’s conception of time allows for a fluid, processual understanding of biography. My research suggests that caregivers do biographical and time work when a spouse is ill. They reinterpret the past, present, and future to sustain biographical continuity and a meaningful sense of self and other.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.027
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Contemporary EthnographySame topicHistory, Culture, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207