MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4245153366 · doi:10.24124/2014/bpgub1628

Stories of attachment for northern indigenous families

2014· dissertation· en· W4245153366 on OpenAlexaff
Carolyn Ann Doody

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousStorytellingFace (sociological concept)Gender studiesNarrativeSociologyPsychologyHistoryArtSocial scienceLiteratureEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Storytelling is an art that has existed since time began. Storytelling is an integral component to Indigenous societies and is used to teach, entertain and heal. Indigenous societies have endured the generational trauma of disrupted attachment. Many Indigenous families are working very hard to persevere in the face of adversity. It is important for northern Indigenous people to have access to therapeutic literature. Northern Indigenous families can benefit from literature that affirms their familial bonds and encourages families to stay strong and remain close. The intention of this project is to share the therapeutic use of stories with northern Indigenous families for the purpose of healing disrupted attachment. In this project I explore, what attachment is and how it was disrupted in Indigenous societies, what bibliotherapy is and how it is an effective therapeutic tool and most importantly, the importance of storytelling in Indigenous societies. This project contains five stories, written by me, for northern Indigenous families on various attachment topics. The stories are intended to speak to the issue of disrupted attachment, affirm existing attachments and bring families close through the sharing of healing stories. --Leaf ii.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.383 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics→French-language works237,207→