MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039991463 · doi:10.1080/13811118.2010.524070

Suicide, Big Five Personality Factors, and Depression at the American State Level

2010· article· en· W2039991463 on OpenAlexaff
Stewart J. H. McCann

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Suicide Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgreeablenessConscientiousnessNeuroticismBig Five personality traitsPoison controlExtraversion and introversionPsychologyPersonalityPopulationSuicide preventionSuicidal ideationHierarchical structure of the Big FiveSuicide attemptClinical psychologyDemographyMedicineMedical emergencySocial psychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research determined the relation of the 2004–2005 American state suicide rates to state means on neuroticism, agreeableness, extraversion, openness, and conscientiousness as assessed by Rentfrow, Gosling, and Potter (2008 Rentfrow , P. J. , Gosling , S. D. , & Potter , J. ( 2008 ). A theory of the emergence, persistence, and expression of geographic variation in psychological characteristics . Perspectives on Psychological Science , 3 , 339 – 386 .[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Multiple regression strategies were used to analyze relations between state suicide rates and state personality means with state socioeconomic status, White population percent, urban population percent, and depression rates controlled. Multiple regression analysis showed that neuroticism accounted for 32.0% and agreeableness another 16.3% of the variance in suicide rates when demographics and depression were controlled. Lower neuroticism and lower agreeableness were associated with higher suicide rates. Lower neuroticism and lower agreeableness may be important risk factors for completed suicide but not suicidal ideation or attempted suicide.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations43
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Suicide ResearchSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207