MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W199631910 · doi:10.26076/a8b8-08c0

Theory of Change Projects Used in Marriage and Family Therapy Programs

2021· article· en· W199631910 on OpenAlex
David J. Prior

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - USU (Utah State University) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheory of changeEpistemologySociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Theory of change papers and projects are used by various marriage and family therapy (MFT) training programs throughout the United States and Canada. Little is known about how these projects differ and are similar from program to program. The purpose of this study was to obtain a better knowledge and understanding about these projects. Questionnaires regarding the use of theory of change projects were sent to all accredited and candidacy MFT programs throughout the United States and Canada. An exploratory, descriptive design was used to guide the research, and content analysis was used to analyze the data. The research was done in an attempt to answer the three research questions: (a) what percentage of MFT programs are using theory of change projects?, (b) what are the processes used in preparing and presenting the projects?, and (c) what is the content required in these projects? The research revealed that 27 (59%) programs that responded used theory of change projects. Among the data from these programs, nine themes emerged in the processes used to prepare and present the projects. Furthermore, there were four unique aspects to processes in preparing and presenting the projects. With regards to content required in the projects, there were six themes found which consisted of 23 categories. The six themes were theory/models, change, the therapy process, client issues, therapist issues, and contextual issues. After reviewing the literature it is believed that theory of change projects may be useful in the training of marriage and family therapists. It has been learned through this study that many program directors are using some components in their projects that may be useful to other directors as they form or refine their own theory of change projects. In forming a theory of change project, it appears important to have students conceptualize both the change process and the treatment process and to integrate theory with practice. It is hoped that findings from this study will be useful to both those MFT program directors and faculty that do not require a theory of change project, but desire to develop one, and those that already have a project, but are trying to improve it. The findings from this study will help programs gather ideas from each other in an attempt to make MFT training more useful throughout the U.S. and Canada.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.908

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.193 · 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