MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069216989 · doi:10.1080/14780880701473466

Accomplishments in Social Constructionist Counseling: Micro-analytic and Retrospective Analyses

2007· article· en· W2069216989 on OpenAlex

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

VenueQualitative Research in Psychology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionSocial constructionismStrict constructionismConversationNarrativeIntervention (counseling)PsychologyPsychotherapistExploratory researchConversation analysisApplied psychologyMedical educationSocial psychologySociologyEpistemologyMedicineSocial scienceLinguisticsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social constructionist interventions in counseling have seldom been evaluated using theoretically compatible research methods. In this exploratory study, 11 clients participated in 1-hour lifestyle consultations conducted by narrative, solution-focused collaborative language systems counselors. The interventions (co-constructing shared understandings, inviting reflections, and introducing new discourses) were primarily evaluated using conversation analysis. Clients and counselors were also asked to retrospectively comment on their experience in videotaped passages where they had been participants. An example of each analyzed intervention, along with corresponding client and counselor commentary, is presented. The results are discussed in relation to training and supervision in social constructionist approaches to counseling, and for contributions this approach to research can make in widening the evidence base for counseling interventions.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.332
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.341
GPT teacher head0.635
Teacher spread0.295 · 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