Beyond survival : the experience of identity in the later stages of recovery from incest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A qualitative, phenomenological methodology was used to explore and describe the experience of women's identity in the later stages of recovery from incest. Seven women between the ages of thirty and fifty seven years of age were interviewed about their experience of their sense of themselves in the later stages of their healing process. Colaizzi's (1978) methodological approach to phenomenological research was used to analyze the interview material and the following five themes emerged: an increasing sense of visibility and connection, an emerging sense of self definition and self acceptance, a shift in world view, a sense of regret over what has been lost, and a sense of resiliency and growth. These five themes were common to all of the women's experience of their identities in the later stages of recovery from incest. A follow up validation interview with each of the women served the purpose of confirming and clarifying the findings that were generated from the initial interview. These results expand our understanding of the experience of these seven women's sense of themselves at the later stages of their recovery from incest. Recommendations for future research and implications for counselling practice are provided.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".