MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403840317 · doi:10.1177/10892680241289577

Plucking Heartstrings: <i>Guqin</i> , Aesthetic Attunement, and TCM Music Therapy

2024· article· en· W4403840317 on OpenAlexafffund
Wenlei Huang, Jie Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of General Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMusic Therapy and Health
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAttunementPsychologyMusic therapyPsychotherapistAestheticsTonalityPsychoanalysisCognitive psychologyEpistemologyPhilosophyArtVisual artsMedicineMusical

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Chinese cultural context, music is deeply intertwined with the human heart and plays a central role in both healing and governance. Guqin , an ancient Chinese zither, exemplifies holistic care throughout history, embodying heart-based empathy and resonance. This study draws on insights from traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), classic philosophy, literature, and aesthetics to trace a lineage of thinking that continues to inform contemporary music therapy. We examine the Chinese notion of xin /heart and the interdependent self, and how music facilitates individuals’ aesthetic attunement toward the natural and social orders. Our approach transcends limitations of Euro-American psychological paradigms centered on the psyche, by adopting a holistic perspective that emphasizes the interconnectedness of the heart, the body, and the cosmos. We argue for the necessity of moving beyond reductive biomedical treatment models to explore alternative ways of living and alternative care that highlight relational, moral, and aesthetic approaches to well-being.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of General PsychologySame topicMusic Therapy and HealthFrench-language works237,207