MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116196972 · doi:10.2105/ajph.93.2.232

Perceived Discrimination and Depression: Moderating Effects of Coping, Acculturation, and Ethnic Support

2003· article· en· W2116196972 on OpenAlexaffabout
Samuel Noh, Violet Kaspar

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Public Health · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoping (psychology)AcculturationEthnic groupPsychologyMental healthSocial supportImmigrationEthnic discriminationClinical psychologySocial psychologyRacismPsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors evaluated the effects of cultural norms and social contexts on coping processes involved in dealing with perceived racial discrimination. Cross-sectional data derived from personal interviews with Korean immigrants residing in Toronto were analyzed. Among the respondents, active, problem-focused coping styles were more effective in reducing the impacts on depression of perceived discrimination, while frequent use of passive, emotion-focused coping had debilitating mental health effects. The present findings lend greater support to a social contextual explanation than to a cultural maintenance explanation of coping processes. They also suggest that, when empowered with sufficient social resources, racial minority individuals of diverse cultural heritages are more likely to confront than to accept racial bias.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 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

Citations904
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Public HealthSame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207