Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37621928›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2023

Promoting appetitive learning of consensual, empowered vulnerability: a contextual behavioral conceptualization of intimacy.

Louisiana Contextual Science Research Group

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Louisiana Contextual Science Research Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vulnerability is emphasized in a number of theoretical models of intimacy (e.g., Intimacy Process Model), including from behavioral and contextual behavioral perspectives. Vulnerability is generally defined as susceptibility to harm and involves behaviors that have been historically met with aversive social consequences. From these perspectives, intimacy is fostered when vulnerable behavior is met with reinforcement. For example, interventions have trained intimacy by building skills in emotional expression and responsiveness with promising results. Vulnerability has divergent functions, however, depending on the interpersonal context in which it occurs. Functional intimacy is explored through the lens of functional relations, which play a key role in interpersonal processes of power, privilege, and consent. This conceptualization suggests that vulnerability must be under appetitive functional relations, consensual, and empowered for safe intimacy to emerge. The responsibility to promote appetitive learning of consensual, empowered vulnerability to foster intimacy falls to the person with more power in a particular interaction and relationship. Recommendations are offered for guiding this process.

Indexed as

appetitivebehavioralconsentcontextintimacypowervulnerabilitywell-being

Identifiers

PMID37621928
PMCPMC10445171

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.