MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088909262 · doi:10.21606/drs.2020.376

Improving access to psychotherapy in a digital age: an exploratory design study based on five studio classes

2020· article· en· W3088909262 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

VenueProceedings of DRS · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDigital Mental Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStudioDualismPerspective (graphical)Section (typography)Exploratory researchDesign studioOnline learningPsychotherapistPsychologySpecial sectionComputer scienceMultimediaSociologyEngineeringArtificial intelligenceSocial scienceEpistemologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the efforts of governments, psychotherapy remains underused. Drug prescriptions are rising continuously in developed countries. Startups emerged over the last years, offering mostly online therapy services, but they strengthen the divide between the ‘online’ and the ‘offline. To tackle the multifaceted problem of psychotherapy and to avoid ‘digital dualism’, the question we addressed during three years is: ‘What design can do for psychotherapy in a digital age?’ From Fall 2016 to Fall 2018, we offered five student cohorts to work on this question in design classes. In this paper, we explain what is the problem with psychotherapy (section 2), how we conducted the five studio classes in order to explore this problem (section 3) and what are the main ideas resulting from this exploration (section 4). Finally we discuss the results both from an educational and research perspective (section 5).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.860

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.291 · 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