Social Activism in Narrative Therapy: Awakening Magnanimous Inclinations in Therapeutic Conversations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Narrative therapy is well known for its emphasis on deconstructing the influence of marginalizing dominant discourses and re-authoring lives. Narrative work typically concludes with a focus on individuals’ preferred experiences of themselves within their immediate relationships. This article encourages practitioners to pursue therapeutic conversations beyond consolidating clients’ stories of preferred identity. While immensely helpful in therapeutic practice, the notions of “preferred self” and “preferred identity” are concepts with ties to individualism. We can build on White and Epston’s intentions to emphasize relational dimensions by supporting the emergence of what has been coined the “magnanimous self” (Beaudoin, 2023; Beaudoin & Monk, 2024). Exploring clients’ magnanimous inclinations expands possibilities of well-being, is more congruent with collectivistic-inclined cultures, and allows our clinical work to become further aligned with narrative therapy’s dedication to social activism. This process is illustrated with transcripts of conversations with a client struggling with depressive feelings associated with caring for her husband.
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 | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.049 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.019 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".