MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366782253 · doi:10.29173/jjs213s

Warriors in Liminality

2023· article· en· W4366782253 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adrian Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Jungian Scholarly Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicJungian Analytical Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsycheConsciousnessPsychologyId, ego and super-egoFace (sociological concept)Identity (music)HarmLiminalityPerspective (graphical)Military servicePolitical scienceSocial psychologySociologyPsychoanalysisLawAestheticsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses alchemical metaphor to examine the psychological challenges United States military veterans face as they attempt to reintegrate into civilian society. The arc of the research tracks a military member’s progression from Basic Training to the transition back into civilian life. In particular, it pinpoints the psychological harm inflicted by the military’s collective consciousness on the individual psyche. Examining the process of military training from the perspective of a Jungian understanding of the psychological stages of alchemy, the paper illuminates a process that presents each military member with profound difficulties related to identity, the ability to engage in a vibrant relationship with the Self, and the ability to reenter civilian life. In conclusion, it highlights the need for civilians, elected officials, and the mental healthcare community to help military veterans address the psychological pain of their service through practices that support their adjustment to civilian life from a holistic perspective that includes image, soul, and conscious connection fostered between the ego and archetypal forces that animate human life.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueJournal of Jungian Scholarly StudiesSame topicJungian Analytical PsychologyFrench-language works237,207