Editorial introduction: The politics of psychological suffering
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special issue, “The politics of psychological suffering,” draws attention to the contested bases of knowledge in the “psy” professions (psychiatry, psychology, psychotherapy and related disciplines) (Foucault, 1977; Rose, 1999). We aim to explore the political contexts and production of people’s psychological distress. We take “psychological suffering” as the starting point for analysis, as a means of dislodging prefigured notions of individualized “mental illness” or “psychopathology.” This, we hope, serves as a feminist counterpoint to mainstream understandings of psychological suffering as biomedical illness. Exploring a range of experiences (from women’s sexuality to eating difficulties to responses to traumatic events), the articles in this issue disrupt and re-envision the taken-for-granted ways in which the psy professions typically frame and engage with people’s pain.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.017 |
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".