MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006658640 · doi:10.1177/0190272519883910

The Affective Self: Perseverance of Self-Sentiments in Late-Life Dementia

2020· article· en· W3006658640 on OpenAlexafffund
Linda E. Francis, Kathryn J. Lively, Alexandra König, Jesse Hoey

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Psychology Quarterly · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersAGE-WELLCleveland State UniversityAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsPsychologyConstruct (python library)CognitionDementiaSelfAgency (philosophy)Psychology of selfSocial psychologyAffect (linguistics)Personal construct theorySense of agencyCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The self has long been construed as a rational, cognitive construct; the cognitive decline of dementia has therefore been largely viewed as the loss of self. Through qualitative interviews, we find that persons with dementia strive to maintain a coherent self despite their increasing disability. Using the theories of affect control theory (ACT) and ACT-Self, we illustrate their shift from using denotative (cognitive) meanings to reliance on connotative (affective) meanings in defining the situation and choosing identities to enact. As persons with dementia lose the cognitive ability to access shared definitions and reflected appraisals, their connection to the social world narrows to affective meanings of established sentiments and emotional reactions from others. Our findings underscore the creative agency of self and the limitations of the rationalistic bias of sociology by recognizing an affective self that stands in complement to the generally acknowledged cognitive self.

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)0.004
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.390 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Psychology QuarterlySame topicQualitative Research Methods and EthicsFrench-language works237,207