The relationship between cognitive errors and interpersonal patterns in depressed women.
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
Individuals with depression process information in an overly negative or biased way (e.g., Henriques & Leitenberg, 2002) and demonstrate significant interpersonal dysfunction (e.g., Zlotnick, Kohn, Keitner, & Della Grotta, 2000). This study examined the relationship between cognitive errors (CEs) and interpersonal interactions in early psychotherapy sessions of 25 female patients with major depression. Transcripts were rated for CEs using the Cognitive Error Rating Scale (Drapeau, Perry, & Dunkley, 2008). Interpersonal patterns were assessed using the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior (Benjamin, 1974). Significant associations were found between CEs and markers of interpersonal functioning in selected contexts. The implications of these findings in bridging the gap between research and practice, enhancing treatment outcome, and improving therapist training 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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