A Quantitative and Qualitative Approach to Social Relationships and Well-Being in the United States and Japan
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined associations between social relationships and psychological well-being through (a) quantitative analyses of surveys of representative samples ranging in age from 13 to 93 in the United States (N = 1498) and Japan (N = 1641) and (b) qualitative content analyses of 12 focus group discussions conducted separately with American and Japanese participants. Survey results revealed that having a spouse or a best friend was related more strongly to some aspects of psychological well-being in Japan than in the United States. Findings regarding the quality of social relationships were more mixed; some aspects of quality were related more strongly to well-being in Japan but others were related more strongly in the United States. Focus group participants described social relationships as influencing well-being by offering a sense of belonging, providing someone in whom to confide, making too many demands and not allowing enough independence, and affecting perceptions of success in relationships.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it