Expected possible selves and coping skills among young and middle-aged adults with bipolar disorder.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This qualitative study explored expected possible selves and coping skills among young and middle-aged adults with bipolar disorder in Hong Kong. Disruptive or positive experiences associated with bipolar disorder can shape the development of the sense of possible selves. METHODS: Guided by narrative inquiry methodology, 14 Chinese participants (8 women; age range, 22-65 years), recruited from community mental health services and the public, were interviewed. RESULTS: Young participants (18-40 years) elaborated on their expected possible selves as they related to health, work, and family, whereas middle-aged participants (41-65 years) talked about independent possible selves. The participants used problem-focused, emotion-focused, and cultural coping methods to deal with their bipolar disorder and achieve their expected possible selves. Furthermore, the young participants expressed ambivalence towards self-help strategies to manage high mood episodes. CONCLUSIONS: This study not only improves our understanding of possible selves among young and middle-aged adults with bipolar disorder, but also provides information for designing self-help interventions. Limitations of the study along with directions for future research are discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".