Menopause as metamorphosis : the meaning and experience for women of doing well during the menopausal transition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although a normally occurring developmental transition in the life of a woman, menopause has often been portrayed as a negative event with much of the research being focused on the physical aspects of this experience. Less emphasis has been placed on the psychosocial aspects of the menopause transition, or on how women experience well-being during menopause – particularly single women who are not in a committed relationship during this biopsychosocial transition. In light of the extant literature, hermeneutic phenomenology, grounded in a theoretical framework of feminist phenomenology, was used to explore the following research question: What is the meaning and experience of doing well during the menopausal transition for women who were not in a committed relationship throughout the transition? In depth, audio recorded interviews were conducted with 10 post-menopausal women who self-identified as doing well during the transition and were not in a committed relationship throughout the transition. Using van Manen’s (1990) approach to hermeneutic phenomenology, the following common themes emerged: 1) a sense of menopause as a physical non-event; 2) the importance of relationships and dialogue with other women; 3) a sense of freedom; 4) a sense of transitioning to another phase of life; and 5) menopause as metamorphosis. Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) criteria were used to ensure the trustworthiness of the findings. The findings of the study are discussed in light of the existing research and theory, and the implications for the practice of Counselling Psychology and future research 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".