MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735723872 · doi:10.1080/10503307.2017.1349350

How clients “change emotion with emotion”: A programme of research on emotional processing

2017· review· en· W2735723872 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychotherapy Research · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPsychotherapistAnxietyAffective neuroscienceMeaning (existential)Cognitive psychologyBorderline personality disorderProcess (computing)PersonalityClinical psychologySocial psychologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews a body of research that has examined Pascual-Leone and Greenberg's sequential model of emotional processing or used its accompanying measure (the Classification of Affective Meaning States). Research from 24 studies using a plurality of methods examined process-outcome relationships from micro to macro levels of observation and builds support for emotional transformation as a possible causal mechanism of change in psychotherapy. A pooled sample of 310 clinical and 130 sub-clinical cases have been studied, reflecting the process of 7 different treatment approaches in addressing over 5 different presenting clinical problems (including depression, anxiety, relational trauma, and personality disorders). The initial findings on this model support the hypothesis that emotional transformation occurs in specific canonical sequences and these show large effects in the prediction of positive treatment outcomes. This model is the first in the field of psychotherapy to show how non-linear temporal patterns of moment-by-moment process relate to the unfolding of increasingly larger changes to create good psychotherapy treatment outcomes. Finally, clinical application of the model is also considered as a template for case formulations focused on emotion. Clinical or methodological significance of this article: This review article examines research on a specific model of emotional processing. (i) Experiencing certain key emotions during psychotherapy seems to predict good treatment outcomes, at both the session and treatment levels. (ii) There is also evidence to suggest that these productive emotional experiences unfold in an ordered pattern. Moreover, (iii) support for this way of understanding emotional processing comes from a number of very different treatment approaches and for several kinds of major disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.692
GPT teacher head0.621
Teacher spread0.070 · 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