Towards a convergence of Dialogical Self Theory and Semiotic Self Theory through triadic phenomenology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a theoretical convergence between Dialogical Self Theory and Semiotic Self Theory by using C. S. Peirce’s phenomenology as a metatheoretical framework. Peirce’s categories of Firstness, Secondness, and Thirdness account for all kinds of experience; they are distinct but intertwined. Our hypothesis is that this theoretical umbrella can combine complementary aspects of both theories, such as space and time, and the multivoicedness and integrative tendencies of the self. We apply the categories to analyze the externalization of the internal conversation of a participant in a qualitative study. The dialogue was elicited through a psychodramatic instrument that is based on J. L. Moreno’s empty-chair technique. In the resulting discourse, we observed aspects of Firstness: the fluctuating multiplicity of the I; of Secondness: the dyadic relation between pairs of I-positions; and of Thirdness: the self construed as a developing sign process that generates interpretants/voiced positions, and tends towards unity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.026 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".