Interpersonal styles of chronically depressed outpatients: Profiles and therapeutic change.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theoretical accounts posit that chronically depressed individuals are perceived as hostile and/or submissive, which compromises their ability to satisfy their interpersonal needs. The current study assessed the interpersonal tenets of McCullough's (2000) chronic depression theory and examined change in interpersonal functioning following McCullough's treatment for chronic depression (viz., Cognitive-Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy; CBASP). Data derive from a randomized 12-week clinical trial that compared the efficacy of CBASP, nefazodone, and their combination for chronic depression. To assess patients' interpersonal impacts, CBASP therapists completed the Impact Message Inventory (IMI) following an early and a late session. IMI data were compared to normative and clinical comparison samples to assess depression-related interpersonal profiles and clinically significant change in interpersonal functioning. As predicted, chronically depressed patients were initially perceived as more submissive and hostile than the comparison groups. Patients' interpersonal impacts on their therapists changed in adaptive, theoretically predicted ways by the end of CBASP treatment, either with or without medication. Individual-level clinical significance data were less robust. The findings generally substantiate McCullough's interpersonal theory and provide preliminary evidence of change in interpersonal impacts following treatment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".