Living with a military-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD): a hermeneutic phenomenological study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study explored the phenomenon of living with military-related (M-R) Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). What it is like and what it means for the (M-R) traumatized person to live with PTSD in everyday living was the research question. The study follows the hermeneutic phenomenological methodology as developed by Max van Manen (1997). The study was conducted both in Canada and in Israel: Thirteen male military veterans, five Canadian former peacekeepers in Bosnia or Somalia (six to twelve years after traumas) and eight Israeli veterans who took part in Israel's wars and/or military operations (six to thirty six years after the traumas), participated in the study. Hermeneutic phenomenological interviewing was the study's main method for collecting lived-experience descriptions. With each of the Canadian participants, a two hour interview was conducted, and with each of the Israelis - one to seven hour interviewing, in one to three meetings. The interviews were taped, transcribed, and translated (if necessary). Phenomenological thematic reflection as a way to uncover the meaningdimensions of the phenomenon was done by researcher, sometimes in collaboration with the participants. Etymological reflection was another method used to disclose the meaning of the phenomenon. A line-by-line thematic analysis of the lived experience descriptions was done, as well as a wholistic approach. Four major themes emerged from the inquiry: trauma remembering, the encounter with death, being hypervigilant in an unsafe world, and being another to oneself and others. It is hoped that the research will contribute to mental health care of (M-R) traumatized persons, as well as to a better understanding of the phenomenon in society at large.
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".