Autonomous motivation for therapy: A new common factor in brief treatments for depression
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: ObservationalConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.877
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 1.000
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
Abstract The authors propose a new common treatment factor, autonomous motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2000 Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M. 2000. The what and the why of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11: 227–268. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), defined as the extent to which patients experience participation in treatment as a freely made choice emanating from themselves. Ninety-five depressed outpatients were randomly assigned to receive 16 sessions of manualized interpersonal therapy, cognitive–behavior therapy, or pharmacotherapy with clinical management. Self-report and interviewer-based measures of depressive severity were collected at pretreatment and posttreatment. Autonomous motivation, therapeutic alliance, and perceived therapist autonomy support were assessed at Session 3. Autonomous motivation was a stronger predictor of outcome than therapeutic alliance, predicting higher probability of achieving remission and lower posttreatment depression severity across all three treatments. Patients who perceived their therapists as more autonomy supportive reported higher autonomous motivation.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Psychotherapy Research
- Topic
- Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Field
- Psychology
- Canadian institutions
- Centre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of TorontoMcGill University
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Deci-PsychologyPsychotherapistAutonomyClinical psychologyDepression (economics)PsycINFOSelf-determination theoryMotivational interviewingInterpersonal communicationMEDLINEIntervention (counseling)PsychiatrySocial psychology
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes