MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2530984669 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0164484

The Relationship of Acculturation Strategies to Resilience: The Moderating Impact of Social Support among Qiang Ethnicity following the 2008 Chinese Earthquake

2016· article· en· W2530984669 on OpenAlexaff
Li Han, John W. Berry, Yong Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersMianyang Normal UniversityNational Research University Higher School of EconomicsMinistry of Education, India
KeywordsAcculturationEthnic groupPsychologyPersonalityModerationStructural equation modelingSocial psychologyPsychological resilienceStyle (visual arts)Social supportDevelopmental psychologySociologyGeographyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

International research has mostly confirmed the positive association between acculturation strategies and resilience in ethnic groups, but the mediating and moderating mechanisms underlying the relationships are still under-investigated. The present study aimed to investigate the associations between acculturation strategies (based on two cultural identities) and resilience of 898 Qiang ethnicity volunteers (mean age = 29.5), especially exploring the mediating and moderating effects of personality, spiritual belief and social support on the relationship between acculturation strategy (using two cultural identities as latent variables in model analysis) and resilience following the occurrence of 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in Sichuan, taking such mechanisms into account. Results were as follows: (1) All variable presented significant positive correlations; (2) Consistent with the mediating hypotheses, personality and spiritual beliefs played a partial mediating role in the relationship between two cultural identities and resilience; (3) High or low level of perceived social support had a moderating effect on cultural identities and resilience; (4) The integration strategy was the most optimal style to promote the development of resilience, but marginalization was the least effective style.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207