MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Religiosity and Coping with Loneliness

2012· article· en· W2015294546 on OpenAlexaff
Ami Rokach, Jackie Chin, Ami Sha’ked

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Reports · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLonelinessReligiosityPsychologyCoping (psychology)FaithSocial psychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loneliness is a universal experience which transcends age, sex, geography, and culture. Religion, and often one's religiosity, are known to affect one's approach to life, behaviour, and social involvement. The present, preliminary study aimed to explore whether coping with loneliness is influenced by one's religious observance. The present study focused on Israeli Jews. 250 participants identified themselves as Secular, Conservative, or Orthodox, by answering a 34-item yes/no questionnaire on loneliness. The three groups statistically significantly differed in their manner of coping with loneliness only on the Religion and Faith subscale, as hypothesized. Similar studies with people of other religious denominations could further highlight that issue.

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)0.001
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 score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.336 · 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

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ReportsSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207