MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1927145850 · doi:10.1080/10503307.2015.1041433

Emotional change process in resolving self-criticism during experiential treatment of depression

2015· article· en· W1927145850 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychotherapy Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyPsychotherapistContext (archaeology)Experiential learningSchematicSelf-criticismCriticismCognitive psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study tested emotion-focused therapy (EFT) theory assumptions concerning optimal emotion schematic processing during experiential psychotherapies. Emotion schematic change was investigated in the particular problem context of resolving self-criticism, an emotion schematic vulnerability to depression identified across all major psychotherapy theories. METHOD: The sample was nine highly self-critical depressed clients who received experiential treatment (n = 5 resolved while n = 4 did not resolve their self-criticism by termination). Emotion episodes (EEs) were exhaustively sampled from five sessions across three therapy phases (early, working phase, and termination) for each client. All their EEs across therapy were coded using a process measure called the Classification of Affective-Meaning States. Three complementary analytic procedures were used to examine emotion schematic changes within and across phases of therapy: graphical/descriptive, linear mixed modelling, and THEME sequential pattern analysis. RESULTS: Convergent evidence from these analyses supported EFT theory. Good resolvers of self-criticism decreased expression of secondary emotions and increased expression of primary adaptive emotions. Good resolvers also exhibited more sequences of EEs consistent with transformation of secondary and maladaptive emotions to adaptive emotions. Future directions of this research are discussed.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.484
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.276 · 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