MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134012181 · doi:10.1080/14733140212331384725

Narrative in psychotherapy theory, practice, and research: A critical review

2002· review· en· W2134012181 on OpenAlex
Augustine Meier

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCounselling and Psychotherapy Research · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSaint Paul University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeNarrative therapyNarrative criticismNarrative inquiryPsychologyNarratologyNarrative reviewPsychotherapistNarrative networkEpistemologyPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper offers a critical review of narrative approaches to therapy, in terms of theory, practice and research. It proposes that narrative approaches currently lack a theory that explains adequately how the reworking of narratives brings about changes and how a client's various narratives are integrated. Research approaches to the study of narrative in therapy are at an early stage. A review of current research into narrative approaches to therapy is presented, and suggestions are offered for further research.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.309
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.245 · 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