A Matter of Life and Death: Integrating Mattering into the Interpersonal–Psychological Theory of Suicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This paper advocates for a more robust sense of mattering into the interpersonal-psychological theory of suicide (IPTS) constructs of perceived burdensomeness and thwarted belongingness. According to IPTS, suicide is precipitated in part by the presence of these twin constructs. IPTS theorists rely on mattering, or feeling significant to others, to undergird theoretical constructs. This is not surprising, as mattering theorists herald "significance to others" as essential to one's will to live. However, IPTS theorists solely leverage mattering to explain perceived burdensomeness. METHOD: This paper summarizes the existing suicide literature on IPTS and mattering. Further, this paper extensively reviews how mattering has been incorporated into IPTS to date, and possibilities for how mattering could be more fully integrated into the theory. RESULTS: IPTS theorists rely on select mattering elements to define perceived burdensomeness. Strong theoretical overlap exists between mattering and thwarted belongingness. CONCLUSION: Mattering can play central role in understanding both perceived burdensomeness and thwarted belongingness. Implications for future research and use of mattering-enriched IPTS are discussed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".