Counteracting stress through leisure coping: A prospective health study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine stress-buffer or -counteracting effects of leisure coping, by taking into account several key axes of society (i.e., gender, social class, and age) that are essential to characterize the diverse nature of our society. A 1-year prospective survey of a representative sample (n = 938) from an urban Canadian city was conducted. In the total sample, long-term health protective benefits of leisure coping became evident when stress levels were higher than lower (i.e., support for buffer effects of leisure coping). However, a health-protective effect of leisure coping to counteract the impact of stress on health was found substantially stronger for people with lower social class than for those with higher social class. On the other hand, health-protective stress-buffer effects of leisure coping were evident regardless of people's gender and age. The findings underscore the importance of giving greater attention to the role of leisure as a means of coping with stress in health practices, particularly among marginalized groups such as individuals with lower social class.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it