Exploring the Impact of a No‐Cost, Self‐Directed Self‐Compassion Intervention in Promoting Mental Health, Resilience and Self‐Compassion Among Women in Violent and Non‐Violent Relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Limited access to social services often hinders women experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV) from seeking support. This mixed‐methods (survey‐ and interview‐based) study investigated the impact of a no‐cost, one‐month, self‐directed self‐compassion intervention on women experiencing IPV compared with women in non‐violent relationships. Among the 28 participants (n = 15 non‐IPV, n = 13 IPV), significant improvements were noted in total self‐compassion scores (F(2,52) = 6.126, p = 0.004, η2p = 0.18), and specific domains such as self‐kindness (F(2,52) = 6.552, p = 0.003, η2p = 0.20) and over‐identification (F(2,52) = 4.251, p = 0.020, η2p = 0.14) over time. Interview findings indicated that women perceived meaningful improvements in their mental health and resilience because of the intervention, with some women in violent relationships reporting that the intervention facilitated leaving the relationship. This intervention demonstrates strong potential as an accessible, effective health promotion intervention for women in violent relationships.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".