MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066347965 · doi:10.1037/0022-006x.69.6.914

A longitudinal investigation of information processing and cognitive organization in clinical depression: Stability of schematic interconnectedness.

2001· article· en· W2066347965 on OpenAlexaff
David J. A. Dozois, Keith S. Dobson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyInformation processingCognitionDepression (economics)SchematicCognitive vulnerabilityVulnerability (computing)Information processing theoryClinical psychologyCognitive psychologyPsychiatryComputer scienceDepressive symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study longitudinally investigated information processing and cognitive organization in clinical depression. The main hypothesis was that individuals whose depression had remitted would show a significant cognitive shift on information processing (e.g., deactivation of negative processing) but not on cognitive organizational tasks, Forty-five individuals with clinical depression completed 2 information processing and 2 cognitive organizational tasks at initial assessment. At 6-month follow-up, the sample (23 remitted, 22 stable depressed) was readministered the tasks. As expected, information processing shifted significantly in individuals who had improved symptomatically, whereas negative cognitive organizational indices remained stable. The implications of these results are discussed as they pertain to the cognitive vulnerability, maintenance, treatment, and recurrence of depression. Directions for future research are suggested.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations90
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Consulting and Clinical PsychologySame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207