Using Strength-Based Approaches to Explore Pretreatment Change in Men Who Abuse Their Partners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Group work with men who batter has traditionally consisted predominantly of psychoeducational programs that ignore concepts such as self-determination, goal setting, and positive engagement with men. More recently, this paradigm has begun to shift to include cognitive approaches and the utilization of strength-based strategies. The present sample included 42 men who were part of an ongoing batterer intervention program. Information for this study included assessment of each man's strengths, their goals, and their perceptions of the changes they felt they had already made prior to attending group treatment. Through a grounded theory analysis, a model was developed that highlights the pretherapeutic change processes that men experience due to their being arrested, charged with a misdemeanour domestic charge, and subsequently convicted of domestic violence. Particularly highlighted are changes in the ways that men view and navigate three distinct areas of their lives: their external world (including work and education); their internal world (perception of self, values, and skills); and their interpersonal relationships with their partner and children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".