Client Aggression Towards Therapists: Is It More or Less Likely with Transgendered Clients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is well known that clients occasionally threaten or assault their therapists. No studies to date have attempted to systematically measure client aggression by transgender patients towards clinicians. One of the major questions of this study was to determine if clients with gender dysphoria have greater levels of aggression towards therapists than non-gender dysphoric clients. One hundred and fourteen professional therapists who are members of the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association responded to a questionnaire that addressed aggression by both transgender and non-transgender clients. Transgender clients were shown to commit significantly less acts of aggression than did non-transgendered clients (p = 0.0094). Within the relatively small subgroup of transgender clients that did commit acts of aggression, male-to-female transgender clients were significantly more likely to do so than female-to-male clients (p = 0.002). While the transgendered client undergoes significant suffering in violating inviolable gender boundaries, this suffering, in general, does not translate into acting out behaviors directed towards their therapists.
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 | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".