MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408559174 · doi:10.1016/bs.dnb.2025.02.005

How is the Land linked to the brain?

2025· book-chapter· en· W4408559174 on OpenAlexaff
Shawn Wilson, Ketil Lenert Hansen, Anna Lydia Svalastog

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopments in neuroethics and bioethics · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusOkanagan College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Strategies to improve mental health must include Indigenous knowledge and ways of living and expression, starting with acknowledging the fundamental importance of connection between the Land and the brain. In this chapter we present and discuss stories about places and land. These stories are fundamental for all people, as they ensure that memories and knowledge are kept alive and thus guide us. Stories teach us how to understand ourselves and how to interact in our relationships with things known and unknown, in a landscape populated by our past and our present. We use Fjellheim’s concept of Sámi cultural landscape to show how ways of living, knowing and being are integrated into ongoing cultural connection to the Land. Fjellheim’s mapping of the Sámi cultural landscape, which analyses the route of South Sámi reindeer herders at Røros, provides a theoretical framework for understanding the relationship between cognition, feelings, attitudes, values, social relations and the Land. We continue with an auto-ethnographic process and set out to investigate which stories about place and Land matter for us, and why. These stories carry memories of the past and experiences we, or people we know, have had. We then present a story of how Land is related to mental health through detailing the impact of wind farms on Sami youth. The colonial past and present harms the connection to cultural landscape, and wants to deny Indigenous relations to Land.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopments in neuroethics and bioethicsSame topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207