Emergent leadership among tenants with psychiatric disabilities living in supported housing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The overall aim of this study was to explore the experiences of people with psychiatric disabilities living as tenants in independent, supported apartments for the first time. Supported housing provides an alternative to structured, custodial housing models, such as foster homes, or board-and-care homes, for clients in public mental health systems. This article reports findings on how leadership emerged among tenants after making the transition from custodial to supported housing. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with tenants (n = 24) and included questions on their housing history, current living situation, relationships with staff, participation, and understanding or experience of leadership. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, codes generated, and a thematic analysis conducted using a constructivist approach. The findings revealed an understanding and appreciation of leadership among tenants, who identified six pathways to leadership in their housing as a response to unmet tenant needs. Most tenant leaders emerged outside of formal authority or power structures. Supported housing provides a unique social setting and empowering community where the potential of persons with psychiatric disabilities to assume leadership may be realized and further developed. Mental health professionals working in community housing networks are well placed to harness these face-to-face tenant communities, and their natural leaders, as an additional tool in promoting tenant recovery, mutual help, neighbourhood integration, and the broader exercise of citizenship.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".