A person-centred conceptualisation of non-suicidal self-injury recovery: a practical guide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a behaviour many counselling psychologists encounter in practice, and the way clinician’s respond can have an important impact on the individual’s experience of recovery. The person-centred NSSI recovery framework incorporates the voices of lived experience in understanding the multi-faceted nature of recovery.Objectives This paper outlines important considerations for how the recovery framework can guide clinicians with respect to both therapeutic stance and intervention targets in order to support clients in navigating their experience of NSSI and recovery.Implications Clinicians should adopt a strengths-based approach and foster self-efficacy and self-compassion with persons with lived experience. This paper provides specific recommendations for counselling psychologists and their clients, including encouraging clinicians to avoid making assumptions about the causes, meanings, and outcomes of self-injury, and to be cognizant of the non-linear nature of the recovery process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".