A Concept Analysis of the Form that Trans-forms as a Result of Transformation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two decades ago, renowned developmental psychologist Robert Kegan made a resounding call to investigate and make explicit, the form that undergoes fundamental change during human transformation. He explained that without precise understanding of the form, “there is no transformation” (Kegan, 2000, p. 48). A review of literature found that this literature gap remains and as such, this study aims to clarify “What form transforms as a result of human biopsychospiritual transformation?” The method to achieve this goal is a concept analysis, which constitutes an empirical examination of a concept described in literature, where a concept---transformation in this case---is the research object. The outcomes illustrate that three structures change form (i.e., transform): the ego, mind, and body. Results reject that consciousness is a human form that transforms. An unexpected finding suggests the content of the life-changing experience (e.g., epiphany) indicates the form that will transform (i.e., the mind) and also the form through which consciousness emerges (i.e., increased consciousness of the mind).
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".