Evolving Canadian Guidelines for Therapy and Counselling with Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents an analysis of two sets of Canadian guidelines for therapy and counselling with women, one that was adopted by the Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) in 1980 and a new version that has just been developed. It shows how the issues and the context of Canadian feminist psychology have, and have not, changed in the intervening years. Although Canadian women have made some substantive gains within psychology and more generally, many systemic gender inequities remain. While the 1980 guidelines arose from a broad-based demand within the feminist community, the new guidelines were a response to a routine policy review by CPA. A primary goal of the 1980 guidelines was to challenge stereotypic assumptions about women. The current guidelines give practitioners direction about how to provide non-sexist therapy that is informed and recognizes the complex and diverse contexts of Canadian women’s lives.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".