“No Amount of Baths Is Gonna Make You Feel Better”: Seeking Balance, Wholeness, and Well-being in Everyday Self-Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, the concept of “self-care” has shifted from the sphere of biomedicine into popular discourse; rather than indicating the practice of maintaining physical health, the term has come to represent a set of broader and more commonplace practices aimed at achieving balance, wholeness, and overall well-being. Drawing from interviews and participant observation with young adult respondents both in college and recently graduated, this study explores what it means to practice this type of “everyday self-care.” Those who practice everyday self-care do so to seek out a holistic sense of happiness and well-being; they value self-care that engages their “whole” self – one conceptualized as made up of both mind and body. They strive for balance in tensions between self-control and indulgence, long-term well-being and immediate gratification, and selfishness and community. Self-care cannot be summed up in a list of activities or practices; rather, it necessitates an ongoing production of moral, economic, and social meanings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".