A four‐year longitudinal study examining psychache and suicide ideation in elevated‐risk undergraduates: A test of Shneidman's model of suicidal behavior
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
OBJECTIVES: Using a 4-year follow-up design, this research investigated Shneidman's model of psychache (i.e., intense mental pain/anguish) as the cause of suicide. Operationalizing suicidal manifestations using suicide ideation, we evaluated Shneidman's assertion that psychache is the prominent predictor of suicide ideation and that other suicide-related psychological variables associate with suicide ideation only through psychache. METHOD: Eighty-two undergraduates at elevated suicide risk were assessed at baseline and follow-up with measures of suicide ideation and three psychological predictors: depression, hopelessness, and psychache. RESULTS: At baseline, only psychache and neither depression nor hopelessness contributed significant, unique information to statistically predicting suicide ideation. For 4-year change in suicide ideation, only psychache and neither depression nor hopelessness provided significant, unique information. CONCLUSIONS: Results provided partial support for Shneidman's contention of the importance of psychache for suicidal behavior and that other psychological factors are only important to suicide insofar as they relate through psychache.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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