MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411694045 · doi:10.1037/per0000718

Is it possible to treat antagonism?

2025· article· en· W4411694045 on OpenAlexaff
Joel Paris

Bibliographic record

VenuePersonality Disorders Theory Research and Treatment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Treatments and Assessments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntagonismPsychologyPsychotherapistMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comments on the article by C. S. Hyatt et al. (see record 2025-13493-001), which describes how therapists feel about treating antagonistic patients. The findings clearly reflect all the difficulties one can have with these cases. It is not surprising that many students felt they needed more supervision to address these problems. That might have made a difference. But what is even more necessary is conducting research into which methods work best. If experienced therapists find these cases problematic and may even avoid treating these patients, why should students have an easier time? In summary, teaching students how to deal with their most difficult cases needs to be guided by data. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePersonality Disorders Theory Research and TreatmentSame topicPsychological Treatments and AssessmentsFrench-language works237,207