MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016730019 · doi:10.1177/1074840706291696

Exploring the Therapeutic Family Intervention of Commendations

2006· article· en· W2016730019 on OpenAlex
Lori Houger Limacher, Lorraine M. Wright

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

VenueJournal of Family Nursing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHermeneuticsIntervention (counseling)ConstructiveDocumentationPsychotherapistPsychologyQualitative researchPedagogyNursingSociologyMedicineEpistemologyProcess (computing)Social sciencePhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Offered in this article are interpretations that emerged in a qualitative, interpretive study focused on the family intervention called a "commendation." The tradition of philosophical hermeneutics informs and shapes the analysis of the data. Research participants include a heterosexual couple and a nurse who engaged in therapeutic conversations focused on difficulties with Internet pornography. Data sources include videotapes of clinical sessions, documentation, and research interviews. Isolated segments of clinical videotape are shared with the couple to prompt their memory of commending practices that emerged in clinical sessions. Commendations are not experienced by this couple as gentle and warm but instead as extremely provocative, albeit constructive. This study illuminates the complex, contextual nature of commending practice and suggests that the noticing of strengths and resources contains much more than the spoken word.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.236 · 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