A Phenomenological Study of the Attitude of Church Attending Caribbean-Canadian Christians Toward Counseling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this phenomenological study was to understand and describe the attitude of church-attending Caribbean-Canadian Christians toward counseling. The two central research questions were, What is the lived experience of Caribbean-Canadian church-attending Christians with counseling? What meaning do Caribbean-Canadian church-attending Christians ascribe to their experience with counseling? The theories guiding this study included expectancy-value and social learning theories. Expectancy-value theory amplifies the belief Caribbean-Canadian Christians have a favorable attitude toward counseling if it aligns with their Christian beliefs. Social learning theory supports the idea that Caribbean-Canadian Christians are shaped by their communal and individual experiencing the world. Data were collected by semi-structured interviews via Microsoft Teams to conform to COVID-19 health restrictions. After the data was collected, it was analyzed using a hermeneutical phenomenological approach, and the results were summarized into themes. The three themes that emerged from this study were Caribbean-Canadian church-attending Christians hold their Christian beliefs as very important and use them to value the worth of an activity. Church-attending Caribbean-Canadian Christians value belonging to a community espousing their Christian beliefs and whose members shared cultural background. Caribbean-Canadian church-attending Christians expressed a positive attitude toward counseling when it conformed to their Christian beliefs and delivered within the context of the meaning of community to them. The research participants also recognized the existence of negative attitudes toward counseling in the wider Caribbean community.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".