MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979088108 · doi:10.1037/h0087246

Identity Development in Men and its Relation to Psychosocial Distress and Self-Worth.

2005· article· en· W1979088108 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sherry L. Beaumont, Ray Zukanovic

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicIdentity, Memory, and Therapy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDistressPsychosocialIdentity (music)Relation (database)Self worthPsychoanalysisErikson's stages of psychosocial developmentSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychotherapistSelf-esteem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nous avons examine la variation des cotes attribuees a la detresse psychosociale et a la confiance en soi en fonction du style d'identite et de la periode d'âge. A cette fin, 275 hommes appartenant a trois tranches d'âge ont rempli des questionnaires d'autodeclaration de style identite, de detresse psychosociale et de confiance en soi. Les scores obtenus sur l'echelle du style d'identite ont determine l'attribution aux participants de l'un de trois styles de traitement de l'identite: informationnel, normatif, pensee diffuse/fuyard. Les jeunes ont declare le niveau de detresse le plus eleve, mais la confiance en soi des plus âges etait inferieure a celle des representants des deux autres groupes d'âge. Les hommes possedant un style d'identite normatif (tous âges confondus) ont declare des degres de detresse inferieurs a ceux des participants de style informationnel ou pensee diffuse / fuyard, et leur degre de confiance en soi etait plus eleve que celui des hommes du groupe pensee diffuse/fuyard. Les resultats sont analyses en fonction du developpement de l'identite et du developpement psychosocial la vie durant.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportementSame topicIdentity, Memory, and TherapyFrench-language works237,207