MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079502226 · doi:10.1037/0008-400x.40.3.185

Entrapment and perceived status in graduate students experiencing a recurrence of major depression.

2008· article· en· W2079502226 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Edward D. Sturman, Myriam Mongrain

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaYork University
KeywordsPsychologyEntrapmentDepression (economics)Graduate studentsClinical psychologyPedagogySurgeryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study used a prospective design to test the role of involuntary subordination as a predictor of major depression. Involuntary subordination is a construct derived from social rank theory and has been implicated as a cause of major depression. Its most salient features include feelings of entrapment and unfavourable social comparisons (i.e., low perceived status). An initial sample of 146 graduate students underwent a diagnostic interview to confirm a history of major depression and also completed measures of entrapment and social comparison. After 16 months, participants were assessed for a recurrence of major depression. Participants who experienced a recurrence of depression had significantly higher levels of involuntary subordination (as measured by factor scores of entrapment and social comparison). A logistic regression analysis also showed that involuntary subordination predicted recurrence of depression, even when controlling for current major depression and the number of previous episodes. The present study demonstrates the advantages of adopting a social rank perspective in modeling major depression.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.174 · 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.

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

Citations29
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportementSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207