MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081750564 · doi:10.1521/jscp.20.4.431.22395

Rejection of Dysphoric Actors and Implications of Depressive Symptom Display

2001· article· en· W2081750564 on OpenAlexaff
Vibeke N. Vaerum, Scott B. McCabe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social and Clinical Psychology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyModerationEmpathyInterpersonal communicationFemininityDevelopmental psychologyAffectionMoodDysphoriaInterpersonal relationshipSocial psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study is an examination of the role of gender, symptom display and gender-role stereotypes on interpersonal rejection in depression. Recent research suggests that differential display of depressive symptomatology during interactions may depend on the gender of the interaction partner. Such differences may account for the reported disparate levels of interpersonal rejection. Male and female undergraduates were videotaped while viewing videotapes of male or female actors, depicting dysphoric or nondysphoric roles, whom they expected to meet in an upcoming interaction. Self-report measures indicated that actors portraying dysphoric roles were more rejected than actors portraying nondysphoric roles by both males and females. Observer ratings of videotapes revealed that participants showed less body movement when watching dysphoric actors, and less eye diversion when watching the female dysphoric actor. Males showed fewer adaptors when watching dysphoric actors. Lower participant empathy was related to greater rejection of dysphoric targets and also served as a moderator in the rejection of female dysphoric actors. Femininity was associated with greater acceptance of actors, independent of mood displayed. Results are discussed with reference to the role of symptom display in rejection.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.411 · 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

Citations7
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social and Clinical PsychologySame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207