Systems of Coping Associated with Dysphoria, Anxiety and Depressive Illness: A Multivariate Profile Perspective
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
As numerous coping strategies to deal with stressors can be used concurrently or sequentially, it may be productive to consider coping from a broad, systemic perspective. Using profile analysis and multivariate techniques, we demonstrated that coping profiles comprising multiple strategies distinguished between various mood states (dysphoria, anxiety, major depression, dysthymia and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD)). Generally, affective disturbances were associated with increased levels of rumination, cognitive distraction and emotion-focused coping (emotional expression, other-blame, self-blame, emotional containment and passive resignation) coupled with diminished problem solving and social support seeking. These coping profiles, however, varied as a function of anxiety vs. dysphoria, and severity of dysphoric symptoms, although the profile of dysphoric individuals was similar to that of clinically diagnosed dysthymic and major depressive patients. While coping profiles were generally stable over time (6 months), improvement or deterioration of mood was accompanied by corresponding alterations of coping profiles. Importantly, coping profile was not simply a correlate of dysphoric mood, but was also found to be an antecedent condition that favored the evolution of more severe affective problems. It is suggested that a multidimensional approach may prove useful in understanding coping as a dynamic system, and may have implications for clinical intervention.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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