MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000743628 · doi:10.1080/16506070701232090

Predictors of Post‐Event Rumination Related to Social Anxiety

2007· article· en· W2000743628 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive Behaviour Therapy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of TorontoWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRuminationSocial anxietyPsychologyAnxietyCognitionAnxiety sensitivityDevelopmental psychologySocial inhibitionClinical psychologyEvent (particle physics)Psychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-event processing is the cognitive rumination that follows social events in cognitive models of social anxiety. The aim of this study was to examine factors that may predict the extent to which individuals engage in post-event processing. Anxious rumination, social anxiety, anxiety sensitivity and post-event processing related to a recent anxiety-provoking social event were assessed in a college student sample (n = 439). Social anxiety and anxious rumination, but not anxiety sensitivity, significantly predicted the extent to which the participants engaged in post-event processing related to an anxiety-provoking social event. Factors that appear to impact on the post-event period include the nature of the social situation and the ethnicity of the participant. It appears that both general rumination over anxious symptoms, and specific rumination related to social events are relevant for cognitive models of social anxiety.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.342 · 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