MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154367094 · doi:10.1027/0227-5910/a000045

The Suicidal Process and Self-Esteem

2010· article· en· W2154367094 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrisis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Health Economics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuicidal ideationPsychologySelf-esteemSuicidal behaviorSeriousnessClinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)Suicide preventionPoison controlPsychiatryMedicineMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It has not been made clear whether self-esteem is associated with the severity of suicidal behavior. AIMS: To test the association between responses to a self-esteem inventory and levels of suicidal behavior as conceptualized in the notion of the suicide process. METHODS: Questions on the severity of suicidal behavior over the lifespan (death wishes, ideation, plans, and attempts), as well as a self-esteem inventory, were administered to 227 university undergraduates. RESULTS: A negative relationship was found between the level of suicidality and self-esteem. As hypothesized, there were fewer cases in each succeeding level of seriousness of suicidal behavior. However, nearly all cases from any particular level were contained in the cohort of individuals who had displayed suicidal behavior at a less serious level. CONCLUSIONS: This suggests a possible progression through each of the stages of suicidal behavior, with very few cases showing a level of suicidal behavior that was not associated with a previous, less serious, form. It was hypothesized that early entry into the suicidal process may be indicated by low self-esteem, thus, allowing for a more timely preventive intervention.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.305 · 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