MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955671890 · doi:10.1177/1363461519858448

<i>Dang-Ki</i> healing: An embodied relational healing practice in Singapore

2019· article· en· W2955671890 on OpenAlexaff
Boon‐Ooi Lee, Laurence J. Kirmayer

Bibliographic record

VenueTranscultural Psychiatry · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonhoodTrancePossession (linguistics)AestheticsConsciousnessPsychologyEmbodied cognitionSociologySocial psychologyAnthropologyArtEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the processes of transformation of the self in dang-ki healing, a form of Chinese spirit mediumship in Singapore, drawing on more than a decade of ethnographic research. In dang-ki healing, it is believed that a deity possesses a human, who is called a dang-ki, to help clients (i.e., devotees). Through the dang-ki, clients can interact with powerful deities in ways that help them feel hopeful and supported. The dang-kis themselves may also benefit therapeutically from their participation as mediums. Many dang-kis suffer from personal conflicts and distress before becoming a medium and they express and transform their distress through the idiom of spirit possession. Since deities represent traits and moral values promoted in Chinese culture, possession by a deity allows the dang-ki to embody an ideal self and to acquire spiritual knowledge by engaging in ritual practices involving cleansing, self-mortification, stereotyped movements, and altered consciousness. At the same time, junior possessing deities must undergo training under the guidance of senior deities to achieve a higher level of spiritual existence by helping clients through the dang-ki's body. Thus, in dang-ki healing, practitioners, clients and possessing deities are transformed in parallel ways. The dynamics of this reciprocal and interdependent healing process differ from the individualistic approaches in Western psychotherapy and shed light on the links between healing processes, cultural ontologies, and concepts of personhood.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.329 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranscultural PsychiatrySame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207