The Wet’suwet’en Nation’s Mobilization of Indigenous Focusing Oriented Therapy: An Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous mental health research is beginning to address colonization, however, Indigenous approaches to wellness have largely been overlooked. There is a paucity of research exploring psychological trauma interventions with Indigenous peoples. The Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs recognize the profound impacts of historical trauma among their people and are utilizing Indigenous focusing oriented therapy (IFOT), a trauma model that is collective, land-based, and intergenerational, as a part of their wellness framework. This collaborative research study explored the question: How is IFOT shaped by Wet’suwet’en ways of knowing and mobilized by individuals, families, house groups, and the Nation? Wet’suwet’en IFOT practitioners participated in sharing circles for data collection and interpretation. The exploratory findings revealed that the strategic application of IFOT by Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs created a culturally relevant model for land-based healing wherein Wet’suwet’en people were able to experience greater connection with their own yintah (land) and c’idede’ (history).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".