MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081138402 · doi:10.1080/15332690903048820

Emotion-Focused Therapy–Therapist Fidelity Scale (EFT-TFS): Conceptual Development and Content Validity

2009· article· en· W2081138402 on OpenAlexaff
Wayne H. Denton, Susan M. Johnson, Brant R. Burleson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Couple & Relationship Therapy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsFidelityPsychologyScale (ratio)Content validityPsychotherapistApplied psychologyCognitive psychologyClinical psychologyComputer sciencePsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Emotion Focused Therapy-Therapist Fidelity Scale (EFT-TFS) is introduced as a scale to measure a therapist's fidelity to the EFT model. The rationale and conceptual development of the scale are presented. Members of an EFT electronic mailing list who participated in a survey (n=130) rated all of the items as highly important for the practice providing support for the content validity of the scale. Finally, the 13 items of the EFT-TFS are presented. Future research directions for the EFT-TFS are presented.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.933

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

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

Citations41
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Couple & Relationship TherapySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207