A Wittgensteinian Perspective on the Use of Conceptual Analysis in Psychology
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
Foreword: Wittgenstein's Philosophy of Psychology as a Critical Instrument for the Psychological Sciences Peter M. S. Hacker 1. Psychology's Inescapable Need for Conceptual Clarification Daniel D. Hutto 2. Wittgenstein's Method of Conceptual Investigation and Concept Formation in Psychology Oskari Kuusela 3. Pictures of the Soul Joachim Schulte 4. Aspect Seeing in Wittgenstein and in Psychology Nicole Hausen and Michel ter Hark 5. Parallels in the Foundations of Mathematics and Psychology Meredith Williams 6. Animal Minds: Philosophical and Scientific Aspects Hans-Johann Glock 7. Realism, But Not empiricism: Wittgenstein Versus Searle Daniele Moyal-Sharrock 8. Can a Robot Smile? Wittgenstein on Facial Expression Diane Proudfoot 9. A Return to 'The Inner' in Social Theory: Archer's 'Internal Conversation' Wes Sharrock and Leonidas Tsilipakos 10. Reducing the Effort in Effortful Control Stuart G. Shanker and Devin M. Casenhiser 11. The Concepts of Suicidology Michael D. Maraun 12. The Neuroscientific Case for a Representative Theory of Perception John Preston and Severin Schroeder 13. Terror Management, Meaning Maintenance and the Concept of Psychological Meaning Timothy P. Racine and Kathleen L. Slaney 14. A Conceptual Investigation of Inferences Drawn from Infant Habituation Research Michael A. Tissaw 15. The Unconscious Theory in Modern Cognitivism Alan Costall
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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