MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2210086380 · doi:10.1177/1060826515600459

The Integrity Model

2015· article· en· W2210086380 on OpenAlex
D. Nahon, Nedra R. Lander

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Men s Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyExistentialismAdaptabilityPsychotherapistResistance (ecology)Universality (dynamical systems)Social psychologyEpistemologyManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recent shift in the literature on the psychology of men calls for a positive understanding of men and masculinities. Long before this, a growing empirical and clinical literature based on nearly five decades of work with men indicates that men have been receptive to a positive, wellness- and values-based Integrity model of existential psychotherapy. Illustrated by two case studies, this article offers a theoretical and clinical exploration of ways in which men address issues of belonging, intimacy, and community with self and others within Integrity-based psychotherapy. This work challenges the literature on men and masculinities and on psychotherapy with men in several key ways: (a) Men engage immediately in Integrity-based work and readily discover their viable emotional voices; (b) they are willing to explore vulnerable emotions within the therapeutic relationship; (c) resistance is practically nil; and (d) the Integrity model has a unique component of adaptability and universality.

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)0.005
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.293
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.138 · 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