Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marcia's (1966) identity status approach was employed in the examination of an existential domain of identity—conceptualized as a component of ideological identity, and operationalized as a multidimensional set of death orientations. Paralleling the identity status constructs of exploration and commitment, the underlying constructs of this domain were proposed to be death contemplation and acceptance. A sample of 149 university undergraduates under the age of 30 completed a questionnaire comprising scales representing the proposed dimensions of contemplation and acceptance, as well as a measure of identity status. A series of multiple regressions indicated that interpersonal achievement status was associated with neutral acceptance (the acceptance of death as a natural part of life); ideological moratorium status was associated with death contemplation, fear, and avoidance; ideological foreclosure status was associated with both approach acceptance (the acceptance of death as a gateway to an afterlife) and escape acceptance (the acceptance of death as a release from pain); ideological diffusion status was negatively associated with both escape and approach acceptance and a view of death as purposeful. These results suggest that existential contemplation occurs but is not resolved in the context of ideological identity development during adolescence and young adulthood. Death acceptance in this population seems more related to either a sense of self that extends to others (an achieved interpersonal identity) or the adoption of a traditional religious belief in an afterlife.
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 | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".