Piloting the home ship: Understanding the deployment experience of Canadian Special Operations Forces Command spouses
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Special Operations Forces (SOF) members are frequently deployed to hostile environments for prolonged periods of time, and their families are exposed to unique difficulties and stressors. The purpose of this study was to describe the lived experience of Canadian Special Operations Forces Command (CANSOFCOM) spouses as it relates to the intensity of the SOF deployment process. As part of a larger study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 29 spouses of CANSOFCOM members. The interviews were coded and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify the central dimensions of spouses' experience with deployment. Participants reflected on their experiences, from pre-deployment to post-deployment, and as they transitioned between deployments, across social/relational, practical/instrumental, and psychological/emotional dimensions. The findings raised important concerns regarding perpetual transitions for the family unit and exhaustion among spouses faced with a deployment loop that never closes. Although results echoed previous studies, in terms of the strain of solo-parenting and coping with children's emotional needs, communication and maintaining connections, these aspects were uniquely affected by repeated deployments, prolonged time away, operations security, and high organizational demands. Although many spouses acquired the strength and skills to cope with the lifestyle, the findings suggest several opportunities to tailor resources and support services to their dynamic needs.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it