MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Coming Out of the Sex Therapy Closet: Using Experiential Psychotherapy with Sexual Problems and Concerns

2007· article· en· W317689982 on OpenAlexaff
Peggy J. Kleinplatz

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Psychotherapy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCoaching Methods and Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningPsychotherapistPsychologyFeelingClosetDreamPleasureSex therapyComplaintSexual dysfunctionPsychoanalysisSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mahrer's Experiential Psychotherapy provides a valuable alternative to conventional sex therapy with individuals and couples. Experiential Psychotherapy uses the sexual complaint as it would any situation or scene described at the outset of therapy, as an entry point to the client's deeper experiencing. Several of the advantages of the methods employed are listed. Specifically, the ways in which Experiential Psychotherapy is ideally suited to dealing with forbidden, haunting, and disturbing sexual feelings, fantasies, and urges are highlighted. Clinical illustrations are presented of experiential dream work with a sexual assault survivor and of a couple referred for treatment of his erectile dysfunction and her low sexual desire. Experiential Psychotherapy effects profound changes in the person(s), connections within and with others, and in bodily phenomena. These outcomes, including freer choices, heightened pleasure and embodiment, extend beyond the predominant treatment paradigm's amelioration of sexual symptoms and disorder.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations39
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PsychotherapySame topicCoaching Methods and ImpactFrench-language works237,207