MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perceptions of the Ways of Mattering by People With Mental Illness

2007· article· en· W1987275771 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

VenueThe Career Development Quarterly · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAlliancePerceptionInternal consistencyConstruct (python library)Mental illnessConstruct validityReliability (semiconductor)Consistency (knowledge bases)Clinical psychologyPopulationSocial psychologyApplied psychologyMental healthPsychotherapistPsychometricsMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ways of Mattering questionnaire (N. E. Amundson, 1993, 2003) was developed to evaluate clients' perceptions of a counseling relationship. This study reports the construct and convergent validities of the Ways of Mattering as well as the internal consistency of each of its subscales for people with mental illness who were registered in supported employment programs. The questionnaire demonstrated satisfactory validity and reliability with this population. The instrument could be useful for identifying the basic and positive elements required to establish a solid foundation for developing a working alliance between the counselor and the client.

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)0.000
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 score0.580
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · 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