MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118413279

Feelings of Incompetence in Novice Therapists: Consequences, Coping, and Correctives

2009· article· en· W2118413279 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingPsychologyCoping (psychology)Grounded theoryPsychotherapistPerspective (graphical)Social psychologyQualitative researchApplied psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Feelings of self-doubt and insecurity about one’s effectiveness are frequently reported by mental health professionals, regardless of their experience level. In novice therapists, feelings of incompetence (FOI) are a central feature in the development of their professional identity. A first-person perspective of FOI will provide insight into its impact and its potential resolution. Ten novice therapists discussed their FOI during a 45–90 minute semi-structured interview. The authors analyzed the transcripts using procedures inspired by grounded theory methodology and distilled a conceptual scheme outlining consequences, coping mechanisms, and self-care training needs. Implications for counsellor education and supervision are discussed briefly.

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.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.284 · 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