MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408364929 · doi:10.1177/09593543251324158

Carl Rogers’ struggle to be “real” and its implications for understanding psychologists’ life–work connections and sociocultural impact

2025· article· en· W4408364929 on OpenAlexaff
Jack Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory & Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociocultural evolutionPsychologyWork (physics)SociologyPsychoanalysisAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines and interprets a significant connection between the life experiences and professional work of Carl Rogers. The focus is on Rogers’ life-long struggle to be “congruent” or “real” in his therapeutic, professional, and personal relationships, a challenge that he never managed to meet fully. In doing so, it illustrates the possible utility of studies of connections between the personal lives of psychologists, the psychological ideas and theories they create, and the sociocultural impact they have.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.083
Scholarly communication0.0120.012
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0050.009
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTheory & PsychologySame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207