MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386650069 · doi:10.1080/01609513.2023.2257755

The use of mindfulness in group work

2023· article· en· W4386650069 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

VenueSocial Work With Groups · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsThe King's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMindfulnessGroup workGroup (periodic table)PsychologyPsychotherapistWork (physics)Clinical psychologyEngineeringMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we explore and discuss the use of mindfulness in group work. We present a definition of mindfulness along with the differences in conceptualizations of mindfulness-based group work based in Buddhist and other nonwestern perspectives compared to Western stances. A brief history of mindfulness in Western psychology is provided along with an outline of the current research on mindfulness; both correlational research and controlled studies involving specific therapeutic modalities. Future research, limitations, and the use of mindfulness with those who have experienced trauma are then presented. An exploration of existing groups that incorporate mindfulness, is followed by suggestions on where mindfulness could be integrated. Finally, the paper concludes by exploring the implications for social work and the use of mindfulness in group therapy.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.825
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.252 · 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