De la mentalisation à la <i>confiance épistémique</i> : échafauder les systèmes d’une communication thérapeutique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quels mécanismes soutiennent les effets bénéfiques d’une psychothérapie? Les développements conceptuels et empiriques récents des thérapies basées sur la mentalisation dégagent des facteurs spécifiques et communs aux effets thérapeutiques en y intégrant la notion de confiance épistémique essentielle à la généralisation de l’effet bénéfique. Cette forme de confiance engendre l’ouverture à apprendre de notre expérience. Ces développements conceptuels entraînent de profondes modifications quant à la manière d’appréhender les mécanismes sous-jacents à l’amélioration thérapeutique. Dans l’article, nous proposons trois systèmes de communications susceptibles de générer l’effet bénéfique de la psychothérapie. Leur présentation forme le coeur du présent article.
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 | 0.026 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.050 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".