Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research sought to operationalize some of the central psychological elements of emergent contemporary selves, herein broadly dubbed, postmodern. These elements involve both the multiplicity of the self-concept (as measured by Linville's self-sorting task) and the accounts that people employ to justify their self-identity (obtained by semi-structured interview and scored using Chandler's developmental taxonomy). Participants also responded to six measures of wellbeing and adaptiveness: perceived stress, locus of control, behavioral flexibility, self-concept confusion, self-esteem, and self-focused attention. It was hypothesized that the combination of high self-multiplicity with more dynamic, or functional, accounts of self-identity, termed multiplicitous functionalism, will contribute to well-being. Participants were 64 female and male undergraduates in the 18- to 24-year age group - a point in the lifespan when self-identity is undergoing considerable flux. Results indicated that, as expected, higher levels of self-identity were associated with greater self-multiplicity. The various measures of well-being were meaningfully correlated. The locus of control construct was used to make a number of important distinctions. For example, those low in perceived stress and those high in behavioral flexibility, self-esteem, and self-clarity reported greater internality. Consistent with the central thrust of this research, multiplicitous functionalism (high in both self-multiplicity and self-identity) was associated with overall psychological adaptiveness and well-being, as evidenced by greater behavioral flexibility and reflection, and less rumination and perceived stress. This thesis has sought to buttress the argument for a developmental consideration of selfhood, contending that recent talk of protean, polyphonic selves do suggest themselves as adaptive, particularly in a culture where instability and fragmentation seem often the case.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".