Whispers, echoes, friends and fears: forms and functions of voice‐hearing in adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the high prevalence of voice-hearing in childhood, research with adolescents aged under 16 years is scarce. Theoretical connections between clinical and developmental conceptualizations of voice-hearing are limited, resulting in missed opportunities to explore unusual sensory experiences with young people. METHODS: Demographic, contextual and qualitative data were collected through a web-based survey with 68 adolescents (M = 14.91; SD = 2.77) from Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, Spain, the United Kingdom and United States of America. A Foucauldian-informed narrative analysis captured phenomenologically meaningful individual accounts and systemically informed narratives. Analytic layers attended specifically to the form and function of voices, including relational, protective, distressing and nuanced experiences, offering new insights into individual, systemic and cultural interpretative narratives surrounding voice-hearing to inform research, policy and tailored support. RESULTS: The average self-reported age of onset of voices was 9 years, 5 months. Reciprocal relationships with pleasant voices were evidenced through the narratives and characterization of voices, while distressing voices were described without reciprocity and the voices held greater power over the young person. Positive aspects of negative voices were discussed and are illustrated with a continuum matrix reflecting interpretation and related affect. CONCLUSIONS: Voice-hearing is a heterogeneous and often complex relational experience for young people, with structural inequalities, relational traumas and social isolation attributed causes of voice-hearing. Developing personal meaning-making mitigated voice-related distress through contextualizing the origin of the voices in past experiences, without attribution to mental illness. Recommendations are proposed for assessment, formulation and relational interventions that recognize the potential impact of the voice-child-other relationship upon psychosocial functioning and wellbeing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".