Differential effects of emotion-focused therapy and psychoeducation in facilitating forgiveness and letting go of emotional injuries.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared the effectiveness of emotion-focused therapy (EFT) involving gestalt empty-chair dialogue in the treatment of individuals who were emotionally injured by a significant other with therapy in a psychoeducation group designed to deal with these injuries. In addition, this study examined aspects of the emotional process of forgiveness in resolving interpersonal injuries and investigated the relationship between letting go of distressing feelings and forgiveness. A total of 46 clients assessed as having unresolved, interpersonal, emotional injuries were randomly assigned to an individual therapy treatment of EFT or a psychoeducation group. Clients were assessed at pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3-month follow-up on measures of forgiveness, letting go, depression, global symptoms, and key target complaints. Results indicated that clients in EFT using empty-chair dialogue showed significantly more improvement than the psychoeducation treatment on all measures of forgiveness and letting go, as well as global symptoms and key target complaints.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it