Psychology and the Department of Veterans Affairs: A historical analysis of training, research, practice, and advocacy.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"This book examines the government's role in caring for veterans and shows how it shaped the science and profession of psychology. The VA led the country in establishing credentials for the practice of psychology. Large-scale employment of clinical and counseling psychologists in the VA led to the emergence of psychologists as health care practitioners in this country. Psychologists had significant leadership roles in the VA's innovative, multisite cooperative research studies and pioneered health care research in such areas as psychopharmacology, gerontology, and tuberculosis. Their work was important in the shift toward a behavioral model of treatment. They also helped establish a number of trends for mental health services in the country, including group therapy, compensated work therapy, and other rehabilitation programs. Additionally, VA psychologists formed advocacy networks among themselves and with the American Psychological Association (APA) and Congress. This book continues the story of the reciprocal influence of psychology and government that was begun in Psychology and the National Institute of Mental Health: A Historical Analysis of Science, Practice, and Policy (APA, 2005). Target readers for this book include psychologists who work in health care fields or have connections with the VA, and others interested in the history of psychology and postwar American life"--Jacket. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it