MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390063599 · doi:10.1353/jip.2023.a915980

Woman, Life, Freedom: The Adlerian Conceptualization of the Woman-Led Revolution Against Tyranny in Iran

2023· article· en· W4390063599 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sara Saeedi, Mitra Heidarpanah, Faranak Ghorbani

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œjournal of individual psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Therapy and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionSociologyAdlerianGender studiesEconomic JusticeDemocracyLawAutonomyPolitical sciencePsychologyPsychoanalysisPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Adler was among the first feminists who opposed Freud’s views on the inferiority of women. He argued that it was society, not nature, which had hindered women’s affinity for Social Interest and that this oppression could be overcome through movements for social justice. He believed that women held the capacity and resilience to fight for themselves against gender-based tyranny. One such fundamental tyranny is against women’s bodily autonomy through the enforcement of strict dress codes, especially in autocratic countries such as Iran. The tyranny of the compulsory hijab in Iran is used to describe the mandatory dress code imposed on women, which involves covering their hair and wearing loose-fitting garments that conceal their bodies. This dress code, referred to as hijab , has been enforced since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. In September 2022, the murder of the Iranian woman Mahsa Amini for her supposed improper observance of hijab ignited the worldwide Woman, Life, Freedom movement. This movement calls for the preservation of women’s rights and a shift to secular democracy in Iran. Adlerian art therapy workshops inspired by this movement were held in Vancouver, Canada, to promote resilience and social justice in the Iranian diaspora. These workshops successfully echoed the Woman, Life, Freedom movement and encouraged ally-ship and advocacy for women.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.492
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.243 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œjournal of individual psychologySame topicArt Therapy and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207