MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Research Findings on Emotionally Focused Therapy: Introduction to Special Section

2012· article· en· W1985567763 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marital and Family Therapy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecial sectionSection (typography)PsychotherapistIntervention (counseling)PsychologyMedical educationClinical psychologyEngineering ethicsMedicineComputer sciencePsychiatryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article introduces the special section "New Research Findings on Emotionally Focused Therapy." Emotionally focused couple therapy researchers have a strong tradition of outcome and process research and this special section presents new findings from three recent studies. The first study furthers the goal of determining the kinds of clients for which EFT is effective (Denton, Wittenborn, & Golden, this issue) and the next two studies (Furrow, Edwards, Choi, & Bradley, this issue; Wittenborn, this issue) focus on the person of the therapist and provide some implications for EFT intervention and training. Together, these three studies provide valuable lessons on how to deepen our knowledge of the application of EFT for different populations and therapists.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.329 · 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