Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test the 'absolute misery hypothesis' that suicide rates are a proxy measure of psychological maladjustment within the general population of young people. METHOD: Study I regressed World Health Organization statistics on youth suicide rates on measures of adolescent adjustment across seven countries. Study II analysed the results of a Canadian survey involving 2,111 children from 31 schools in grades seven to 12 (ages 11-20 years, mean = 15.5, SD = 1.7). The survey contained measures of suicidality, depressed affect and social comparison. RESULTS: Study I found that male suicide was much more likely in psychologically well-adjusted countries than in less well-adjusted countries. Although not statistically significant in a sample of this size (n = 7), correlation analysis suggested that the relationship between suicide and adjustment was in the opposite direction for females. Study II found that suicidality in boys was not associated with depressed affect on its own, or with social comparison on its own, but was associated with the combination of depressed affect and negative social comparison. By contrast, suicidality in girls was significantly associated both with absolute and comparative levels of unhappiness. CONCLUSIONS: A new, 'relative misery hypothesis' is proposed to account for these results. Under this hypothesis, the disposition of vulnerable young men towards suicide is influenced by their affective state relative to others. When those around them are perceived to be better off than they are, the predisposition of young men to suicide is increased. By contrast, female suicide is predicted to be less influenced by young women's relative state, and more by their absolute level of unhappiness. The primary implication of the relative misery hypothesis is that the prevention of young male suicide in particular is likely to require methods that discourage vulnerable individuals from making negative social comparisons.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".