MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297201567 · doi:10.1111/jep.13761

Empathy and shame through critical phenomenology: The limits and possibilities of affective work and the case of COVID‐19 vaccinations

2022· article· en· W4297201567 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Golafshani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotions and Moral Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShameEmpathyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Phenomenology (philosophy)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakPsychologySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PsychotherapistMedicinePsychiatrySocial psychologyEpistemologyVirologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)PhilosophyDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper begins by developing the critical phenomenologies of shame and empathy. It rejects that empathy is the supposed antidote to shame, and rather demonstrates the ways in which they function in parallel. The author contends that both shame and indeed empathy risk objectifying and fetishizing the other who is being shamed or empathized with. This argument and phenomenology about the relationship between shame and empathy is then applied and further developed through a case study of COVID-19 vaccinations. The author explores whether empathy and shame ever "work" to increase vaccine uptake, and ultimately argues that both affects do and do not depending on the structures of power informing the specific context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.241
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical PracticeSame topicEmotions and Moral BehaviorFrench-language works237,207