MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990373313 · doi:10.1037/a0014334

Systemic-constructivist couple therapy (SCCT): Description of approach, theoretical advances, and published longitudinal evidence.

2008· article· en· W1990373313 on OpenAlexafffund
David Reid, Faye K. Doell, Erin Dalton, Saunia Ahmad

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychotherapy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersYork University
KeywordsIntrapersonal communicationPsychologyPsycINFOInterpersonal communicationContext (archaeology)PsychotherapistIntervention (counseling)Developmental psychologySocial psychologyMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The systemic-constructivist approach to studying and benefiting couples was derived from qualitative and quantitative research on distressed couples over the past 10 years. Systemic-constructivist couple therapy (SCCT) is the clinical intervention that accompanies the approach. SCCT guides the therapist to work with both the intrapersonal and the interpersonal aspects of marriage while also integrating the social-environmental context of the couple. The theory that underlies SCCT is explained, including concepts such as we-ness and interpersonal processing. The primary components of the therapy are described. Findings described previously in an inaugural monograph containing extensive research demonstrating the long-term utility of SCCT are reviewed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.307 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychotherapySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207