MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251718501 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14645196.v1

Creating the self: the intersubjective nature of experience, self-development, and the phenomenon of play

2021· preprint· en· W4251718501 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica A. Blackwell

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonSelfIntersubjectivityPerceptionPsychology of selfPsychologyEpistemologyRelation (database)Phenomenology (philosophy)SociologySocial psychologyPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this project is to present a phenomenological account of the role of play in early self-development. Using the writings of Merleau-Ponty, Sartre, Winnicott, Laing, Beauvoir, and a selection of modern psychologists, this project argues that play is an essential component of childhood self-development. Starting with the claim that all human experience is inherently intersubjective, this project argues that other people play a crucial role in shaping our sense of self and who we become. From the moment we are born, other people play a critical and constant role in shaping our perception of who we are and who we can become. It is argued that play, like linguistic communication, is itself a necessarily intersubjective phenomenon, and that authentic acts of play are essentially a matter of the child learning about the nature of reality and other people, and of striving to make sense of these things while simultaneously working on creating the self.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.040
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhilosophy, Ethics, and ExistentialismFrench-language works237,207