MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048861222 · doi:10.1521/jscp.24.2.172.62269

Effects of Suppressing Negative Self–Referent Thoughts on Mood and Self–Esteem

2005· article· en· W2048861222 on OpenAlex
Jennifer L. S. Borton, Lee J. Markowitz, John Dieterich

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social and Clinical Psychology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySelf-esteemReferentMoodNegative moodDepressed moodClinical psychologyDepression (economics)Developmental psychologyThought suppressionCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers have implicated thought suppression as a factor in the etiology and maintenance of a variety of psychological disorders, including obsessive–compulsive disorder, post–traumatic stress disorder, and depression, but have virtually ignored the potentially harmful effects of suppression on self–esteem. In the current study, we examined the effects of suppressing negative self–referent thoughts on subsequent state self–esteem and mood. Participants who suppressed their negative thoughts, compared to those who did not, experienced lower state self–esteem and more anxious and depressed mood. In addition, participants who rated their thoughts as highly depressing were particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of suppression. The results emphasize the importance of examining the consequences to the self–concept and mood of suppressing negative self–referent thoughts.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.389 · 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