MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003090567 · doi:10.1080/07481181003697712

Suicide Notes from India and the United States: A Thematic Comparison

2010· article· en· W2003090567 on OpenAlexaff
Antoon A. Leenaars, Shalina Girdhar, T.D. Dogra, Susanne Wenckstern, Lindsey Leenaars

Bibliographic record

VenueDeath Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuicidologyCollectivismSuicide preventionAggressionThematic analysisPsychologyPoison controlCross-cultural studiesHuman factors and ergonomicsInjury preventionSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyCriminologyClinical psychologyMedicineMedical emergencySociologyQualitative researchPolitical scienceSocial scienceIndividualismLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suicide is a global concern, hence, cross-cultural research ought to be important; yet, there is a paucity of cross-cultural study in suicidology. This study sought to investigate suicide notes drawn from India and the United States, as these countries have similar suicide rates but markedly different cultures. A thematic or theoretical-conceptual analysis of 72 suicide notes drawn from these countries, matched for age and gender, was undertaken, based on Leenaars' (1996) multidimensional model of suicide. The results suggested that there were more commonalities than differences; yet, not consistent with previous cross-cultural studies of suicide notes, Indian notes expressed more indirect expression including veiled aggression, or aggression turned inward, and unconscious dynamics. It was concluded that the model may be applicable to suicide in both countries, but also much greater study in India is warranted on collectivism and dissembling as a suicide risk factor.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDeath StudiesSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207