Childhood adversity, perceived discrimination, and coping strategies in relation to depressive symptoms among First Nations adults in Canada: The moderating role of unsupportive social interactions from ingroup and outgroup members.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aboriginal peoples are at greater risk of experiencing early life adversity relative to non-Aboriginal peoples in Canada, and as adults frequently experience high levels of discrimination that act as a further stressor. Although these factors appear to contribute to high rates of depressive disorders and suicidality in Aboriginal peoples, the psychosocial factors that contribute to the relationship between childhood adversity and the development of depressive symptoms have hardly been assessed in this group. The present investigation explored potential mediators to help explain the relation between childhood trauma and depressive symptoms among a sample of First Nations adults from across Canada. These mediated relationships were further examined in the context of unsupportive social interactions from ingroup and outgroup members. In Study 1, (N = 225), the relationship between childhood trauma and depression scores was mediated by perceived discrimination, and this was particularly notable in the presence of unsupportive relations with outgroup members. In Study 2, (N = 134) the relationship between childhood trauma and depressive symptoms was mediated by emotion-focused coping that was specific to coping with experiences of ethnic discrimination, and this mediated effect was moderated by both outgroup and ingroup unsupportive social interactions. Thus, it seems that experiences of discrimination and unsupport might contribute to depressive symptoms among First Nations adults who had experienced early life adverse events.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".