Transformational Focusing Experiences: A Thematic Analysis of Memoirs
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
Transformation is a profound change process culminating in a fundamental shift in one’s sense of self and way of being-in-the-world. Research on transformation is limited, particularly transformation as a holistic, bodily felt process. A process called Focusing was identified by Gendlin (1981), who formulated how the body participates in personal change and meaning creation. The aim of our study was to explore the characteristics and qualities of transformation by examining 19 published memoirs of people who had gone through a transformational experience via Focusing. Two questions guided the inquiry: What kind of inner environment is necessary for transformation? What are the characteristics and qualities of transformative experiences that unfold through a Focusing-oriented process to weave together a “new kind of person?” Researchers conducted a thematic analysis of the memoirs through a new qualitative method called Felt Sense Inquiry. Results revealed five themes: expanded bodily self, attuned attention, novelty, interactive exchange, and elastic time. Results suggest a way of experiencing that does not divide, but rather connects the person to a unified felt process that unfolds on its own. Future research comparing Focusing with other practices that seem to promote transformation may reveal “common factors” of transformation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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