The Enneastructural Model of Occupational Engagement (EMOE): A Neuro-Phenomenological Framework for Occupational Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Occupational therapy is founded on the philosophical principle that engagement in meaningful occupations is a determinant of health and well-being. Foundational models such as the Model of Human Occupation (MOHO), the Person-Environment-Occupation (PEO) model, and the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance and Engagement (CMOP-E) have provided invaluable frameworks for understanding the components, context, and core drivers of occupation. However, a deeper, more structured understanding of the "Person" component—specifically, the predictable, patterned variations in what individuals find meaningful and how they are motivated—remains an area for theoretical development. This paper introduces the Enneastructural Model of Occupational Engagement (EMOE), a novel framework designed to complement existing models by providing a high-resolution lens into the person. The EMOE posits nine fundamental archetypes of occupational being, derived from the Enneagram of Personality, which describe core motivational structures that shape an individual's volition, habits, and performance. This paper re-contextualizes these archetypes for occupational science, defining their Core Occupational Drivers, Core Occupational Threats, and their corresponding adaptive and maladaptive occupational patterns. To ground this phenomenological typology in empirical science, the EMOE establishes a theoretical bridge to the Five-Factor Model of personality, leveraging the extensive body of research in personality neuroscience to infer the neurobiological substrates of each archetype. By integrating Cloninger's distinction between temperament and character, the EMOE further proposes a developmental framework wherein occupational therapy facilitates character growth through mindful engagement, enabling individuals to manage their innate temperamental predispositions. The discussion demonstrates how the EMOE enriches and unifies MOHO, PEO, and CMOP-E by providing a detailed etiology of volition, a structured view of the person, and a typology of the nine distinct paths to meaning. The EMOE offers a path toward a truly personalized, archetype-informed, and neuro-phenomenologically grounded occupational therapy.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".