Stressful events and depression among Chinese adolescents: The mitigating role of protective factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the role of salient external factors (family, peer and school caring relations) and internal factors (goals and aspirations, problem solving and self-efficacy, empathy, and self-awareness) in protecting adolescents experiencing interpersonal problems and academic pressure from depression. A total of 1,297 eighth and ninth grade students in Shandong province of Eastern China completed self-report measures. Results of hierarchical regression analyses indicated that interpersonal problems and academic pressure predicted depression positively. Peer caring relationships, home caring relationships, goals and aspirations, problem solving and self-efficacy, and self-awareness predicted depression negatively, but empathy did so positively. The interactions of home caring relationships with interpersonal problems, peer caring relationships with academic pressure, and self-awareness with academic pressure were negatively associated with depression. The relationships between interpersonal problems and depression, and academic pressure and depression, were less apparent for adolescents who had higher levels of peer caring relationships, home caring relationships, and self-awareness. The results suggest that school psychologists and counselors should note and build upon positive strengths while providing intervention services for adolescents experiencing depression related to interpersonal problems and academic pressure.
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 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) | 0.002 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".