MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515314040 · doi:10.1037/cou0000167

How do depressive symptoms in husbands and wives relate to the interpersonal dynamics of marital interactions?

2016· article· en· W2515314040 on OpenAlexafffund
Ivana Lizdek, Erik Z. Woody, Pamela Sadler, Uzma S. Rehman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Counseling Psychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyWifeDominance (genetics)Interpersonal communicationPsycINFOInterpersonal relationshipPartner effectsDepressive symptomsAffect (linguistics)Clinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyAnxietyPsychiatryMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated how depressive symptoms in husbands and wives may affect patterns of interpersonal behavior during marital conflict discussions. Using the Continuous Assessment of Interpersonal Dynamics (CAID) approach, observers rated moment-to-moment levels of dominance and affiliation for each partner, from which dynamic indices were derived, including the slopes for each partner and the degree of rhythmic entrainment between partners. Results supported predictions that the wife's depressive symptoms would be related to alterations in the dynamics of dominance, whereas the husband's depressive symptoms would be related to alterations in the dynamics of affiliation. For example, the higher the husband's depressive symptoms, the less affiliative both the wife and husband became over the interaction and the less entrained the partners were on affiliation. The results shed new light on gender differences in the impact of depressive symptoms on the management of marital disagreements. (PsycINFO Database Record

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Counseling PsychologySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207