MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091684839 · doi:10.1177/0030222815569440

The Multidimensional Mortality Awareness Measure and Model

2015· article· en· W2091684839 on OpenAlexaff
Oona Levasseur, Mark R. McDermott, Kathryn D. Lafreniere

Bibliographic record

VenueOMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisengagement theoryPsychologyConstruct (python library)Reliability (semiconductor)Construct validityMultivariate statisticsConceptual modelMeasure (data warehouse)Incremental validitySocial psychologyClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychometricsStatisticsGerontologyMedicineComputer scienceMathematicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For each of eight literature-identified conceptual dimensions of mortality awareness, questionnaire items were generated, producing 89 in all. A total of 359 participants responded to these items and to questionnaires measuring health attitudes, risk taking, rebelliousness, and demographic variables. Multivariate correlational analyses investigated the underlying structure of the item pool and the construct validity as well as the reliability of the emergent empirically derived subscales. Five components, rather than eight, were identified. Given the item content of each, the associated mortality awareness subscales were labeled as legacy, fearfulness, acceptance, disempowerment, and disengagement. Each attained an acceptable level of internal reliability. Relationships with other variables supported the construct validity of these empirically derived subscales and more generally of this five-factor model. In conclusion, this new multidimensional measure and model of mortality awareness extends our understanding of this important aspect of human existence and supports a more integrative and optimistic approach to mortality awareness than previously available.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations42
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOMEGA - Journal of Death and DyingSame topicDeath Anxiety and Social ExclusionFrench-language works237,207