Operationalizing cognitive vulnerability and stress from the perspective of the hopelessness theory: A multi‐wave longitudinal study of children of affectively ill parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The current study tested the diathesis-stress component of the hopelessness theory (HT) in a sample of youth using (1) a weakest link approach towards operationalizing cognitive vulnerability (e.g. a child's degree of vulnerability is determined by his/her most depressogenic inferential style; DIS) and (2) an idiographic approach towards operationalizing high stress (e.g. high stress is when a child is experiencing a level of stress that is higher than his/her own average level of stress). We also examined whether the association between within-subject fluctuations in hassles and depressive symptoms in cognitively vulnerable youth was moderated by absolute stress levels (the between-subject effect of stress). DESIGN: A multi-wave longitudinal design was used to examine whether the association between within-subject fluctuations in hassles and depressive symptoms was moderated by a depressogenic weakest link. METHODS: At Time 1, 140 children (between 6 and 14 years of age) of parents with a history of major depressive episodes completed measures assessing DISs and depressive symptoms. Every 6 weeks, for the subsequent year, children completed measures assessing depressive symptoms and hassles. RESULTS: The results of hierarchical linear modelling analyses indicated that a depressogenic weakest link was associated with greater elevations in depressive symptoms following elevations in hassles in girls but not in boys. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide partial support for the applicability of the diathesis-stress component of the HT to youth. Integration of the current findings with those obtained in past research examining the diathesis-stress component of the hopelessness theory in youth suggests the utilization of an idiographic approach to examining vulnerability-stress theories may potentially lead to an increased understanding of gender differences in depression.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".