MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214669356 · doi:10.1111/etho.12330

Your Own Personal Illness: Interpretation through the Spiritual Malady in Alcoholics Anonymous

2022· article· en· W4214669356 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Alastair Parsons

Bibliographic record

VenueEthos · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)IdeologyReciprocity (cultural anthropology)Articulation (sociology)Social psychologyPsychologyAgency (philosophy)EthnographyEpistemologySociologyPhilosophyLawLinguisticsPolitical scienceAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Some Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) members conceive of the fundamental problem they share as a “spiritual malady.” Based on fieldwork among three AA groups in Nova Scotia, Canada, this article advances an ethnographic description of the concept. Through a close examination of how the spiritual malady was interpreted by my interlocutors, I propose that the concept creates a cultural framework for the articulation of subjectivities and the interpretation of psychologies. I argue that it exists through a reciprocity of private and public meanings that are more the product of interactions between AA members than the learning and repetition of a formal ideology. This analysis becomes a means of exploring the agency of AA members as producers of meaningful representations of the challenges they feel they hold in common.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.015
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthosSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207