MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013092888 · doi:10.1080/0886571x.2010.520637

Care and Control: Working Alliance Among Adolescents in Authoritarian Settings

2010· article· en· W2013092888 on OpenAlexaff
Mylène Magrinelli Orsi, Denis Lafortune, Serge Brochu

Bibliographic record

VenueResidential Treatment for Children & Youth · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllianceAuthoritarianismIntervention (counseling)PsychologyContext (archaeology)Interpersonal communicationPsychotherapistDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article reviews the literature published in the last 20 years on working alliance in adolescents involuntarily enrolled in intervention programs. Firstly, Bordin's adaptation of the concept of working alliance to adolescent populations is discussed. This is followed by an analysis of the main results of empirical studies on helping relationships in authoritarian settings. Finally, the results of these studies are used as the basis for a multidimensional (personal, interpersonal, contextual) model of working alliance in young people in authoritarian settings. A key conclusion of this article is that differences in intervention context are essential to the understanding of the establishment of working alliance in young people. A dyadic vision of working alliance (patient/therapist) does not appear to significantly advance the theory of clinical practice.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResidential Treatment for Children & YouthSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207