A Relational Dialogue with Maurizio Andolfi: Master Family Therapist and Social Psychiatrist
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maurizio Andolfi, MD, an internationally renowned Master Family Therapist and Social Psychiatrist, was recently awarded an Honorary Fellowship in the World Association of Social Psychiatry for his many contributions to child psychiatry, family psychotherapy, and social psychiatry. This article offers an overview of Dr. Andolfi’s origins, professional training, and career achievements and identifies the key themes and techniques he elaborated throughout his career as a child psychiatrist, family psychotherapist, and social psychiatrist. The heart of this encounter with Dr. Andolfi is based on a comprehensive interview which is presented as a relational dialogue , inspired by his approach to relational psychology and relational therapy. A relational dialogue is an exchange between interlocutors who alternate fluidly in the roles of active listening and speaking to each other respectfully. Dr. Andolfi’s responses to a dozen questions are edited into a narrative with numerous direct quotes, organized by thematic labels in his own words, from what motivated him to become a psychiatrist and family psychotherapist to how he sees the relationship between family work and social psychiatry, and finally, to how he sees the nature of change and transformation in psychotherapy and how he now experiences authenticity with maturity and the voice of experience.
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 | 0.009 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".