MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Giving Colin a voice: the challenge of narrative therapy with a client who has an intellectual disability and communication difficulties

2002· article· en· W2079908409 on OpenAlexaff
David Betchley, Wendy Falconer

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Social Work · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeNarrative therapyAugmentativeSocial workIntervention (counseling)PsychologyWhite (mutation)Intellectual disabilityAugmentative and alternative communicationSociologyPsychoanalysisArtPsychiatryLiteratureLawLinguisticsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper a narrative approach, developed by Michael White of the Dulwich Centre, Adelaide, was applied by social workers to work with a 12-year-old boy Colin, who has an intellectual disability and communication difficulties, to challenge the dominant story around his troublesome behaviours. Colin's family was at high risk of family breakdown and placing Colin in permanent out of home care at the commencement of the intervention. Colin was regarded by teachers and carers as troublesome. Colin wanted to communicate but lacked skills in clear communication. The social workers explored alternative views of his problems to assist in the development of a ‘new story’, utilising a narrative approach that highlighted Colin's strengths and abilities, at home, at school and in other settings. Augmentative communication was an important method of assisting the emergence of the ‘new story’ for Colin and his family.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.151
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations7
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Social WorkSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207