A group’s level of defensive functioning affects individual outcomes in group psychodynamic-interpersonal psychotherapy.
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
= 136) were individuals with BED enrolled in group psychodynamic-interpersonal psychotherapy (GPIP). Participants completed attachment interviews and were assessed on interpersonal distress and days binged at pretreatment and 6 months post-treatment. The interview audio recordings were transcribed and used to code defensive functioning. We found that individual overall defensive functioning (ODF) scores at pretreatment were not significantly associated with binge-eating frequency or interpersonal distress at 6 months post-treatment. Other group members' mean ODF scores at pretreatment were significantly associated with individual interpersonal distress at 6 months post-treatment. However, the other group members' mean ODF scores were not significantly associated with individual binge-eating outcomes at 6 months post-treatment. Defensive functioning of other members of a therapy group may be particularly important for improving interpersonal functioning in individuals with BED. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 it