A quest for self‐soothing: A systematic case study into emotion‐focused therapy with an emotionally avoidant client who committed sexual offenses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The current study is part of a multiple case study that investigated the emotional change in individuals who have committed sexual offenses (ISOs). This case study highlights how one client used sex as a maladaptive coping strategy to suppress negative emotions. METHOD: A mixed-methods design was used to track changes in the client's affect regulation (AR) during four phases, including a baseline (Phase A), treatment as usual (Phase B), treatment with an emotion-focused therapy (EFT) component added (Phase C), and follow up (Phase A). RESULTS: The qualitative description with verbatim clinical vignettes, revealed deeper insight into some important steps and hindrances and the impact of specific EFT-interventions. Quantitative analysis of self-report and observational measures showed a significant improvement in the client's AR across different phases of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The study improves our knowledge of the emotional change in ISOs during treatment and illustrates some key interventions, steps, and hindrances.
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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".