Life Stress Events and Alcohol Misuse: Distinguishing Contributing Stress Events From Consequential Stress Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the relationship between life stress events and level of alcohol misuse using two stress indices. The first index consisted of stress events that are not likely to be caused by alcohol misuse (i.e., alcohol uncontaminated stress events). The second stress index consisted of items that were judged as being likely consequences of alcohol misuse (i.e., alcohol contaminated stress events). Results based on a questionnaire study of 378 undergraduates in 2000 showed that level of alcohol misuse was much more strongly related to alcohol contaminated life stress events than alcohol uncontaminated life events. Comparative analysis of the coefficients of determination indicated the effect size of the association to alcohol contaminated life stress events was 240% larger than the corresponding effect size for the association to alcohol uncontaminated life events. Results suggest that studies, which are tests of the tension reduction hypothesis, should employ greater methodological rigor to ensure measures of life stress events are not inadvertently assessing the consequences of alcohol misuse. The results highlight the need to distinguish between stressful life events that contribute to alcohol misuse and stressful life events that are consequential to alcohol misuse.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".