MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2469688989 · doi:10.1521/jsyt.2000.19.4.73

The Narrative of Ethics and the Ethics of Narrative: The Implications of Ricoeur's Narrative Model for Family Therapy

2000· article· en· W2469688989 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Randall R. Lyle, Diane R. Gehart

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Systemic Therapies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSt. Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeNarrative therapyFamily therapyNarrative criticismForgivenessNarrative inquiryPsychologyNarratologySociologyPsychotherapistEpistemologyPsychoanalysisSocial psychologyPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we explore Paul Ricoeur's meditations on language, memory, and forgiveness as a means to better understanding ethical concerns of narrative construction in family therapy. These meditations highlight that narrative construction is fundamentally a relational process and therefore encourages a relationally responsible form of liberating narrative. The article includes a review of current perspectives on ethics in narrative therapy, an overview of Ricoeur's narrative theory, and a discussion of the implications of Ricoeur's theory for family therapists.

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Systemic TherapiesSame topicCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207