Bridging the gap between cognitive and interpersonal variables in depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Cognitive and interpersonal variables are often understood to be related to the etiology and maintenance of major depression. However, few studies have examined the relationship between these two constructs. Aim This study examined the association between cognitive errors (CEs) most commonly endorsed among individuals with major depressive disorder ( MDD ) and their interpersonal functioning. Method These processes were examined early in psychotherapy and at the end of 20 sessions of cognitive behavioral therapy for depression. Therapy transcripts of 42 clients with MDD were rated for CEs using the Cognitive Error Rating Scale ( CERS : Drapeau, Perry & Dunkley, 2008) and for interpersonal behaviors using the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior ( SASB : Benjamin & Cushing, 2000). Findings Results of this study revealed significant associations between CEs and interpersonal behaviors early in treatment and at the end of treatment. Implications of these findings are discussed in the context of improving psychotherapy process and outcome.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".