Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay explores the impact of shell-shock on individual soldiers, the collective understanding of wartime trauma during and after the First World War, and the discourse of mental health in the medical field and public sphere. Additionally, it aims to identify when the discourse of psychological trauma began to shift toward more contemporary understandings of mental health. In order to draw out the voices of Canadian soldiers who were not able to openly discuss their emotions due to the stigmatisation surrounding shell-shock, this study will utilise various sources such as soldier diaries, battalion orders, and the Library and Archives of Canada database. Moreover, this essay aims to uncover how shell-shock was suppressed by wartime officials and those with the power to appropriately aid soldiers inflicted with shell-shock. In order to search for the reticence and silence of shell-shock, I examine the censorship of soldiers' experiences on the homefront, the secrecy surrounding war-related trauma in the general public, and the hyper-masculinized attitudes within battalions that viewed shell-shock symptoms as a manifestation of mental weakness. While I focus primarily on Canadian soldiers during World War I within this essay, it is acknowledged that all soldiers, hospital staff, and those affected by the war were susceptible to various forms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".