Social anxiety among East Asians in North America: East Asian socialization or the challenge of acculturation?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
North American research has consistently reported higher social anxiety among people of Asian heritage compared to people of Western heritage. The present study used a cross-national sample of 692 university students to explore explanatory hypotheses using planned contrasts of group differences in social anxiety and related variables. The East Asian socialization hypothesis proposed social anxiety would show a linear relation corresponding to the degree of exposure to East Asian cultural norms. This hypothesis was not supported. The cultural discrepancy hypothesis examined whether bicultural East Asian participants (residing in Canada) would endorse higher social anxiety in comparison to unicultural participants (Western-heritage Canadians and native Koreans and Chinese). Compared to unicultural participants, bicultural East Asian participants reported higher social anxiety and depression, a relation that was partially mediated by bicultural participants' reports of lower self-efficacy about initiating social relationships and lower perceived social status. Overall, the results suggest higher reports of social anxiety among bicultural East Asians may be conceptualized within the context of cultural discrepancy with the mainstream culture.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it