MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Anxiety and Depression: Congruent, Separate, or Both?1

2003· article· en· W2165328862 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

VenueJournal of Applied Biobehavioral Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyPsychologyDepression (economics)Trait anxietyTraitClinical psychologyConstruct (python library)PsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated whether using state‐trait distinctions of both depression and anxiety would allow for further identification of the unique and overlapping features of these two symptom structures. Three hundred and seventy‐one undergraduate students (122 men, 249 women) responded to questionnaires exploring both state and trait depression and anxiety. Results revealed that women reported higher levels of depression and anxiety for all measures except for state anxiety, where men scored higher than women. Results also demonstrated stronger within‐construct correlations (i.e., state depression with trait depression) than between construct correlations (i.e., state depression with trait anxiety), supporting the distinctness of the two constructs. The uniqueness of depression and anxiety was further supported by factor analysis. Overlap in symptoms also occurred, but the correlations were generally stronger for congruent symptom types (i.e., state depression and state anxiety rather than state depression and trait anxiety). Results are discussed in terms of viewing depression and anxiety as distinct constructs with overlapping features.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.315 · 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