MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perfectionistic Self‐Presentation and Trait Perfectionism in Social Problem‐Solving Ability and Depressive Symptoms

2010· article· en· W2170449605 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 Social Psychology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerfectionism (psychology)PsychologyTraitPresentation (obstetrics)DistressClinical psychologyDepressive symptomsDepression (economics)AnxietyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined social problem solving and perfectionistic self‐presentation, and assessed whether social problem solving mediates the association between perfectionism and depression. A sample of 200 community members completed measures of perfectionistic self‐presentation, trait perfectionism, social problem‐solving ability, and depression. Correlational analyses confirmed that perfectionistic self‐presentation and socially prescribed perfectionism are both associated with a negative problem‐solving orientation. Tests of mediating effects revealed that negative problem‐solving ability mediates the associations of socially prescribed perfectionism and perfectionistic self‐presentation with depressive symptoms, particularly among women. The findings support further exploration of mediational models linking perfectionism, problem‐solving ability, and depression and suggest that people who display high perfectionistic self‐presentation are particularly vulnerable to stress and distress and should benefit from problem‐solving training.

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)0.001
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 score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.319 · 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