What are they doing? A national survey of help‐seeking and relationship‐repair behavior of individuals who are thinking about divorce
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guided by the Stages of Change (SOC) model, we explored relationship-repair behaviors among those thinking about divorce, employing a recent national longitudinal survey of married individuals (N = 745). Person-centered analyses explored whether there were distinct typologies of relationship-repair behaviors. We found four distinct classes: Intense Seekers (6%), who engaged at high levels of all kinds of repair behaviors, including professional services; Moderate-fading Seekers (14%), who engaged in moderate levels of various repair behaviors, including professional services, but did not sustain that behavior over a year; and Minimal-private Seekers (42%) and Private-sustained Seekers (38%), who eschewed professional services and engaged in low-to-moderate personal and private repair behaviors. We discuss possible applications of the SOC model to the divorce decision-making process and conclude with implications for practice, including the need to allocate greater attention to personal and self-help interventions that match the way most people try to repair their relationships.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".