MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280583330 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v12n5p108

McEwan’s Enduring Love: A Psychoanalytical Investigation

2022· article· en· W4280583330 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roohollah Reesi Sistani, Ruzy Suliza Hashim, Marziyeh Farivar

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicThemes in Literature Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoanalytic theoryObject relations theoryPsychoanalysisObject (grammar)InstinctPsychologyRelation (database)Perspective (graphical)Id, ego and super-egoPersonalityEpistemologyPhilosophyArtEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay is a psychoanalytic examination of Ivan McEwan's novel ‘Enduring Love’. The Object Relation Theory, which asserts the existence of a fundamental human instinct known as mother-child relationship, provides a unique viewpoint on how an individual interacts with his or her environment. It is about studying the characters' behaviours and attempting to understand them from a psychoanalytic perspective. The anxieties and tensions that permeate McEwan's characters' psyches in Enduring Love will be shown via the use of synthesising key phrases and concepts from Klein, Fairbairn, and Winnicott's object-relations theory. Klein, Fairbairn, and Winnicott argue that during an infant's early years, there are both good and toxic things from the outside world. These things, which include activities, people, and relationships, are referred to as objects, and are internalised as positive or negative experiences, indicating that what we live through, contributes to the development of our self and personality. Mother is an object, and the infant's relationship with his or her mother is critical to the child's maturation, growth, development, and later stages of life. According to this, identifying the source of McEwan's characters' failures in their interactions and relationships with one another results in their early childhood's unsatisfactory emotional experiences, resulting in an imperfect development in later stages of life in establishing healthy relationships.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.026
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicThemes in Literature AnalysisFrench-language works237,207