Externalizing Metaphors: Anxiety and High‐Functioning Autism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TOPIC: The intent of this article is to explore the efficacy of both the literal and concrete externalization aspects within narrative therapy, and the implementation of interactive metaphors as a combined psychotherapeutic approach for decreasing anxiety with people who present with high-functioning autism. PURPOSE: The purpose of this exploratory article is to propose the use of externalizing metaphors as a treatment modality as a potentially useful way to engage clients. Specifically, a three-step process of change is described, which allows for concretizing affective states and experiences, and makes use of visual strengths of people presenting with an autism spectrum disorder. SOURCE: A selective review was conducted of significant works regarding the process of change in narrative therapy, with particular emphasis on metaphors. Works were selected based on their relevance to the current paper and included both published works (searched via Psyc-INFO) and materials from narrative training sessions. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to address the testable hypotheses resulting from the current model. This line of research would not only establish best practices in a population for which there is no broadly accepted treatment paradigm, but would also contribute to the larger fields of abnormal psychology, emotion regulation, and cognitive psychology by further elucidating the complex ways these systems interact.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".