Rejection of Dysphoric Actors and Implications of Depressive Symptom Display
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".