Developmental filial therapy: process-outcome research on strengthening child-parent relationships through play in a setting for victims of domestic violence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research study was conducted in partial fulfillment of the dissertation requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy. The small scale pilot process and outcome study examined: (a) the therapeutic efficacy of intensive (i.e., daily) filial therapy for victims living within a domestic violence shelter; and (b) the dynamic processes of child-parent enactments within Melanie Klein's (1932/1975, 1950) theoretical constructs and clinical interpretation on object relations, and that of developmental stage theory (e.g., symbiosis, differentiating, practicing, rapprochement) in early childhood (Mahler, 1952, 1968; Mahler, Pine, & Bergman, 1975) and adulthood (Bader & Pearson, 1983, 1988, 1990) interpersonal relationships. In doing so, the hallmarks play therapy and therapeutic principles of filial therapy (VanFleet, 1994, 1999a) were examined and evaluated by means of both quantitative (e.g., treatment outcomes) and qualitative (e.g., process-orientated interpersonal) measures. Four (4) mother-child dyads participated in the study, which was undertaken on-site at a local domestic violence shelter in Calgary, Alberta. The study was based on accounts of treatment interventions with children and mothers conducted by the present author, a clinical psychologist and registered play therapist/supervisor. The study also includes the author's specifically developed and designed instrumentation for investigating interpersonal processes, and for which interrater measures were obtained. These results suggest supportive findings on both the level of filial treatment efficacy and for an integrative theoretical foundation linking a developmental interpretation and understanding of intrapersonal and interpersonal human processes.
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 | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".