MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318218444 · doi:10.29173/pandpr29510

What is Moral Disquiet and How Does the Experience of Moral Disquiet Appear in Professional Human Practices?

2023· article· en· W4318218444 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Helene Torsteinson, Tone Sævi

Bibliographic record

VenuePhenomenology & Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhenomenonSociologyQuality (philosophy)Moral authorityNursingMoral disengagementPsychologyLawSocial psychologyPolitical scienceMedicineEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What does moral disquiet mean to professional human practices? The phenomenon of moral disquiet comes to awareness in concrete lived human experiences and might be described with the help of examples from practice. The article explores lived moral disquiet in nursing, teaching and caring practices. It highlights moral disquiet from direct descriptions in which the phenomenon arises as an event in students’ lifeworlds including professional human relationships in societal institutions like a hospital, nursing home and kindergarten. We suggest that moral disquiet, expressed as the human sensitivity toward others, does not depend on success or failure of outcome, but is a quality of belief and hope in the lives of others that offers possible moments of humanness.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhenomenology & PracticeSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207