MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1897205842

Psychology: A Closer Look at what Psychologists Bring to the Table

2012· article· en· W1897205842 on OpenAlexaffabout
Elizabeth Laliberte

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthConfusionPsychologyField (mathematics)Table (database)Applied psychologyPromotion (chess)Community psychologyPublic relationsSocial psychologyPsychotherapistPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to explore the vital contributions that the field of clinical psychology is consistently giving to the citizens of Canada.  The services provided by psychologists are unique in their own right, however there is much confusion in the healthcare field regarding the specificity of their roles, and the average healthcare consumer can be overhwhelmed in trying to understand the differences between psychologists and other mental health professions.  This advocacy peice ultimately serves to clarify what it is psychologists bring to the table, including an exploration of the benefits of psychotherapy, issues around cost-effectiveness of psychological treatment and medicare coverage, differences between psychologists and other mentalhealth professionals, and the promotion and preventative role psychologists maintain concerning mental health issues.  Overall, the goal of this paper is to outline the overall worth and functionality of the field of clinical psychology.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.009

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207