The process of including the other: Patterns of interaction, meaning- and decision-making observed on the way to improved relationships with self and others
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis presents a dialogical theory of change that describes persons as systems of voices in dialogue, and suggests that (1) events are experienced as problematic when relevant voices' positions are excluded from influence, and that (2) problems are resolved as relevant voices' positions are increasingly included (i.e., valued, influential) in meaning-and decision-making.This theory represents an elaboration of the assimilation model that emerged out of applying an iterative, team-based approach to theory-building case study research to two successful couple therapies.Observations supported the hypothesis that the processes by which increases in selfand other-understandings develop are isomorphic: in both contexts, self-similar patterns of perception, emotion, intention, communication, and action were observed as once-excluded aspects of experience came to be increasingly included in meaning-and decision-making.These patterns were summarized in the resolution of problematic experiences sequence (RoPES), which appears applicable to tracking intra-and interpersonal therapeutic change.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".