MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Attachment and Separation

2004· book-chapter· en· W2476132846 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel M. Ogilvie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonConstruct (python library)Identity (music)Face (sociological concept)Scripting languagePsychologyRepetition (rhetorical device)EpistemologyCognitive scienceSocial psychologyCognitive psychologyPsychoanalysisComputer scienceAestheticsPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The study of J. M. Barrie brings us face to face with an issue that confronts all human beings and is more problematic for some than for others. The matter involves the question of how can one be embedded in relationships (that is, connected with others) and construct a sense of identity that, in some respects, is independent of one's relationships. This chapter introduces some ideas pertaining to attachment and separation in a way that provides a general platform for the remaining chapters in part II. The accept me/reject me balancing act that Barrie perfected with Margaret throughout his childhood continued to be played out during his adult years. Freud's concept of “repetition compulsion” can be applied to this phenomenon if we think of such compulsions in terms of repeating variations of general patterns of behavior instead of replicating specific actions. These patterns are not random. Instead, they can be thought of as being guided by scripts. The elements of Silvan Tomkins' script theory are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207