Neighborhoods and neighbors: Do they contribute to personal well‐being?
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
Abstract The present study examined the relationship between characteristics of neighborhoods (with set physical boundaries and relatively homogeneous populations) and personal well‐being as mediated by sense of community and neighboring behavior. A randomly selected representative sample of 345 residents living in non‐apartment dwellings in Winnipeg, Canada, completed a mail survey that included created measures of neighboring and sense of community and the General Health Questionnaire. Results demonstrated that sense of community mediates the relationship between neighborhood stability (as defined by the marital status and mobility) and residents' well‐being. The frequency of engaging in neighboring behavior was not directly predictive of residents' sense of personal well‐being, but was predictive of increased sense of community. Consistent with previous research, findings highlight the importance of building a sense of community among residents in a neighborhood. Implications of findings for neighborhood planning are discussed. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Comm Psychol 32: 9–25, 2004.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 it