MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071473045 · doi:10.1080/14999013.2013.832442

Non-Suicidal Self-Injury in Women Offenders: Motivations, Emotions, and Precipitating Events

2013· article· en· W2071473045 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jenelle Power, Shelley L. Brown, Amelia M. Usher

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Forensic Mental Health · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAngerRegretPsychologyClinical psychologyFeelingAnxietyCoping (psychology)Suicide preventionInterpersonal communicationPoison controlPsychiatrySocial psychologyMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) poses a serious threat to the safety and well-being of offenders and staff, making it a critical issue for correctional institutions, yet little is known about NSSI adult women offenders. Fifty-six women residing in Canadian federal correctional institutions with a history of NSSI participated in semi-structured interviews to explore their behavior. More than two-thirds of the women interviewed reported engaging in NSSI as a method of coping with negative emotions. The most common emotions reported prior to engaging in NSSI were anger, depression, and anxiety. The most common event that preceded NSSI was interpersonal conflict. After self-injuring, women most commonly reported feelings of relief, followed by regret. Whereas many women described similar experiences with NSSI, this research suggests that NSSI is a complex behavior with many different motivations and precipitating factors, and that effective treatment should consider the individual's unique needs.

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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.294
Threshold uncertainty score0.483

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Forensic Mental HealthSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207