Is <i>how</i> it is said important? The association between quality of therapist interventions and client processing
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the association between the quality of therapist interventions and client in‐session processing using the York Therapist Process Measure (YTPM; Toukmanian and Armstrong, 1998). The instrument's three dimensions — attunement, tentativeness and meaning exploration — were tested separately for their impact on clients' manner of processing and depth of experiencing. For each of the 20 mild‐moderately depressed clients, treated in short‐term experiential therapy, a high and a low client‐process segment was isolated from a session that was judged by an experienced therapist to manifest the greatest amount of “good therapy moments”. Therapist interventions within these segments were then rated on the YTPM. Results revealed significant differences in the quality of therapist interventions between high and low segments. Attunement and tentativeness were associated significantly with greater complexity in manner of processing, and meaning exploration with greater depth in experiencing. The implications of these findings for psychotherapy research 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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it