Gender differences in perceptions of stressors and utilization of social support among university students.
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
Meme si plusieurs chercheurs ont demontre que le soutien social est un mecanisme d'adaptation efficace pour faire face au stress, tres peu de recherches se sont penchees sur les differences entre les sexes en ce qui a trait au stress percu et au recours au soutien social. Dans la presente etude, 186 etudiants du premier cycle d'une universite des Maritimes ont note la nature stressante percue de cinq scenarios et ont identifie le type et la source de soutien social vers lesquels ils se tourneraient pour faire face a chacune des situations. Comparativement aux hommes, les femmes ont percu trois des cinq scenarios comme etant considerablement plus stressants. Les femmes, beaucoup plus que les hommes, ont indique qu'elles chercheraient du soutien de la part de leur partenaire ou d'amis. Les femmes ont egalement rapporte qu'elle chercheraient un soutien affectif a un niveau plus eleve que ne l'ont indique les hommes. Cependant, lorsque la nature stressante percue des scenarios etait determinee, certaines differences entre les sexes quant aux sources et aux types de soutien disparaissaient.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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