Does time heal all wounds? : the restoration of place attachment after loss of place : the case study of Point Pleasant Park after Hurricane Juan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On September 29th, 2003, Hurricane Juan destroyed 75% of Halifax’s beloved Point Pleasant Park. Park users were struck with grief and developed solastalgic feelings as they mourned the loss of a place that held such natural, cultural, and historical significance. Since 2005, the park has been under-going restoration. Drawing upon well-being, sense of place, place attachment and solastalgia literature, this study utilizes a placed-based approach to determine if long-term users have re-established positive place attachments. Results from interviews and online surveys (n=90) indicate that participants overcame their solastalgic feelings, feel a positive sense of well-being, and have re-established positive place attachments. Interestingly, results suggest that most long-term users have place attachments that are potentially as positive as their pre-disaster attachments, and potentially stronger than those who never experienced the traumatic event. This study concludes that, given enough time to adjust to the rebuilt place, ‘time heals all wounds.’
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".