Interpersonal Self-Efficacy, Goals, and Problems of Persistently Depressed Outpatients: Prototypical Circumplex Profiles and Distinctive Subgroups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Severely and persistently depressed outpatients ( n = 138) completed interpersonal circumplex measures of self-efficacy, problems, and values/goals. Compared with normative samples, patients showed deficits in agency: They reported less self-efficacy, especially for being assertive, tough, and influential; stronger goals, especially to avoid conflict or humiliation; and more problems, especially with being too timid, inhibited, and accommodating. Circular and structural summary indices suggested greater variability among patients in goal profiles than in efficacy or problem profiles; nonetheless, latent profile analyses identified coherent subgroups of patients with distinct patterns of efficacy (e.g., lacking confidence for speaking up vs. setting boundaries) and problems (e.g., being overly inhibited vs. self-sacrificing) as well as goals (e.g., to be included vs. unobtrusive). Women and those with more severe symptoms were overrepresented in the least agentic groups. The results show how observing patients through multiple circumplex surfaces simultaneously can help clarify their interpersonal dispositions and inform interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".