Field Notes from the Light: An Ethnographic Study of the Meaning and Significance of "Near-Death Experiences"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The notion of "engagement," which plays an important role in various domains of psychology, is gaining increased currency as a concept that is critical to the success of digital interventions. However, engagement remains an ill-defined construct, with different fields generating their own domain-specific definitions. Moreover, given that digital interactions in real-world settings are characterized by multiple demands and choice alternatives competing for an individual's effort and attention, they involve fast and often impulsive decision-making. Prior research seeking to uncover the mechanisms underlying engagement has nonetheless focused mainly on psychological factors and social influences and neglected to account for the role of neural mechanisms that shape individual choices. This article aims to integrate theories and empirical evidence across multiple domains to define engagement and discuss opportunities and challenges to promote effective engagement in digital interventions. We also propose the affect-integration-motivation and attention-context-translation (AIM-ACT) framework, which is based on a neurophysiological account of engagement, to shed new light on how in-the-moment engagement unfolds in response to a digital stimulus. Building on this framework, we provide recommendations for designing strategies to promote engagement in digital interventions and highlight directions for future research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".