MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2959608420 · doi:10.1111/cpsp.12298

Empathy in computer-mediated interactions: A conceptual framework for research and clinical practice.

2019· article· en· W2959608420 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Grondin, Anna M. Lomanowska, Philip L. Jackson

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Psychology Science and Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpathyPsychologyConceptual frameworkSimulation theory of empathyCognitive scienceSocial psychologySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empathy plays a crucial role in fostering positive social interactions and is elicited through verbal and nonverbal socioemotional cues. Computer-mediated communication rapidly connects individuals at a distance but can partly filter out nonverbal cues. We draw from available telehealth and emotion communication literature to elaborate a cohesive conceptual framework of online empathy, a tool the field is currently lacking. The distinctive features of online communication and their impacts on the empathic interaction are described. We also detail strategies that users can employ to facilitate feeling, conveying, and being perceived as empathic in computer-mediated communication

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.019
Scholarly communication0.0080.011
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.520
GPT teacher head0.696
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations104
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Psychology Science and PracticeSame topicDigital Mental Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207