Bibliographic record
Abstract
Library SCEB is a model that reframes library practices by building on elements from prominent theories in the positive psychology movement. We assert that certain types of space redesign (S), collection building (C), innovative events and programming (E), and bibliotherapy (B) are closely aligned with Positive Psychology Interventions (PPIs), which have been found experimentally to successfully improve subjective wellbeing (positive emotions, engagement, character strengths) in several disciplines, including education, health care, and organizational studies. We identify challenges with the Library SCEB efforts and recommend strategies for further integration of PPIs in the context of academic, public, and school librarianship. Modèle SCEB en bibliothèque : Recommandation pour les interventions de psychologie positive en milieu documentaire RésuméLa Bibliothèque SCEB est un modèle qui encadre les pratiques des bibliothèques en s’appuyant sur des éléments de théories importantes dans l’acheminement de la psychologie positive. Nous pouvons affirmer que certains types de réaménagement des espaces (S), d’élaboration de collections (C), d’évènements et d’activités innovantes (E) et de bibliothérapie (B) sont étroitement alignés avec les interventions de psychologie positive (PPIs), qui ont été expérimentalement trouvées pour améliorer avec succès le bien-être subjectif (émotions positives, engagement, forces de caractère) dans plusieurs disciplines, incluant l’éducation, les services de santé et les études organisationnelles. Nous avons identifié les défis rencontrés par la Bibliothèque SCEB et recommandé des stratégies pour une future intégration des PPIs dans le contexte de l’académie publique, et des bibliothécaires scolaires. Mots-cléspsychologie positive; interventions de psychologie positive (PPIs); bien-être subjectif; bibliothèques
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.111 | 0.032 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".