Understanding self‐injury recovery: Views from individuals with lived experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) recovery has typically been conceptualized through the lens of formal frameworks or as the cessation of NSSI. These understandings, however, have been developed largely devoid of views from those with lived NSSI experience, who may offer novel and critical insights. To advance the conception of NSSI recovery, the current study elicited such views. METHODS: Two hundred and thirty-three emerging adults with a history of NSSI (77% female, mean age = 18.9 years), responded to open-ended questions regarding recovery. Results were thematically analyzed using an inductive approach. RESULTS: Responses yielded seven themes: (a) recovery is complete NSSI cessation; (b) recovery is more than cessation; (c) recovery involves lingering NSSI features; (d) recovery involves developing resilience; (e) recovery is a process; (f) evolution in understanding recovery; and (g) recovery is a subjective experience. CONCLUSION: Recovery seems to be multifarious, nonlinear, and subjective. Conceptual and clinical implications are discussed.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".