Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".