MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081735467 · doi:10.1080/14779757.2010.9688503

Change Processes in Clients' Self-Perceptions in Experiental Psychotherapy / Veränderungsprozesse in der Selbstwahrnehmung bei Klienten in der Experienziellen Psychotherapie / Procesos de cambio en la percepción que tiene el cliente de su self en psicoterapia experiencial / Les processus de changement dans les perceptions de soi chez les clients dans la psychothérapie expérientielle / Processos de mudança na auto-percepção do cliente em terapia experiencial /

2010· article· fr· W2081735467 on OpenAlexaff
Shaké G. Toukmanian, Darryle-Anne Jadaa, Michael S. Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenuePerson-Centered & Experiential Psychotherapies · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningPsychologyPerceptionSession (web analytics)PsychotherapistTreatment and control groupsDepression (economics)Group psychotherapyClinical psychologyHumanitiesMedicineArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study examined the processes underlying change in self-perceptions and their relation to treatment outcome in short-term perception-focused experiential therapy. Clients (n = 20) receiving this method of therapy showed significantly greater improvement on measures of depression, self-concept, and perceptual congruence than those in a stress-management treatment control group (n = 20). Self-relevant segments, drawn from an early and later therapy session of the treatment group, were rated on the EXP-Scale and on a measure of levels of perceptual processing (LCPP-R). The analyses revealed significant early- to late-therapy improvement in depth of experiencing and ability to engage in complex, internally focused differentiating, reevaluating, and integrating kinds of mental operations. A significant relationship was also found between attained complexity in manner of processing and post-treatment reduction in depression. The implications of these findings for experiential theory and practice are discussed.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.310 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerson-Centered & Experiential PsychotherapiesSame topicPsychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207