MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412952629 · doi:10.1080/1358684x.2025.2537645

Writing for Well-Being in the English Studies Classroom

2025· article· en· W4412952629 on OpenAlex
Lindsey McMaster

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChanging English · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHumor Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsMathematics educationPsychologyPedagogySociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The university years represent a peak period of risk for the onset of mental health struggles, but at the same time provide a venue for students to grow their self-awareness, adopt new coping strategies, and expand their intellectual powers. Could English studies support students in this journey through the medium of writing itself? This paper explores how writing for well-being can be incorporated into the study of English at university, providing practical insights for educators seeking innovative ways to support students while expanding the scope of English as a field of study. A focus on literature as a tool for well-being further contributes to the conversation on cognitive and affective approaches to reading by suggesting how analysing life writing and poetry for therapeutic potential may allow students to leverage both analytical and emotional approaches in the appreciation of literary texts and their larger purpose for humanity.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.330 · 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