MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103674674 · doi:10.5172/hesr.2010.19.4.465

Masculinities and college men’s depression: Recursive relationships

2010· article· en· W2103674674 on OpenAlexaffabout
John L. Oliffe, Mary T. Kelly, Joy L. Johnson, Joan L. Bottorff, Ross E. Gray, John S. Ogrodniczuk, Paul Galdas

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Sociology Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityDepression (economics)IdeologyDualismVulnerability (computing)PsychologySocial psychologySociologyGender studiesPsychoanalysisPoliticsPolitical scienceLawComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depression is a significant problem among college men. This qualitative study examines the interplay between masculinities and depression among Canadian-based college men who self-identified or were formally diagnosed with depression. The resulting three themes – mind matters, stalled intimacy and lethargic discontent – reveal the recursive relationships between masculinities and depression whereby depression quashed men’s aspirations for embodying masculine ideals, with depression potentially triggered by self-doubt and concerns about harbouring a faulty masculinity. Key findings include participants’ juxtaposing their private negative self-talk with attempts to pass as self-assured in public; anxieties about neediness and vulnerability negating their efforts to initiate or maintain an intimate relationship; and ruptured ideologies about a mind–body dualism whereby severe depression negatively impacted physical wellbeing.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations54
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Sociology ReviewSame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207