MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897538396 · doi:10.1002/ijop.12541

Negative thoughts in depression: A study in Iran

2018· article· en· W2897538396 on OpenAlexaff
Parvaneh Mohammadkhani, Mahdi Bagheri, Keith S. Dobson, Elham Eskandari, Masoumeh Dejman, Judith Bass, Fatemeh Abdi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Psychology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences
KeywordsPsychologyDepression (economics)CognitionBeck Depression InventoryClinical psychologyMajor depressive disorderDepressive symptomsNegativity effectPsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cognitive theory of depression proposes significant relations between negative thoughts and depression. Evidence for the model has been widely observed in Western countries. However, despite the high prevalence of depression in the Middle East (ME), there has been limited research that has evaluated the cognitive profiles of people living in this region, and especially in non-Arab countries like Iran. The current research examined these relationships in Iran. Convenience sampling was used to recruit 80 depressed and 80 non-depressed individuals via advertising in clinics and public areas, respectively. Depression status was checked with a structured interview, the Major Depressive Disorder subscale of the Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire, and the Beck Depression Inventory-II. All participants completed the Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire-Negative to examine the frequency of negative automatic thoughts. Unlike other results from Arab countries, depressed participants indicated significantly more negative thoughts towards self and future compared with the non-depressed group. The results of the present study are consistent with the negativity hypothesis of the cognitive theory of depression. Further research is needed in the in ME, to investigate other hypotheses of this theory in this region. Strengths and limitations of the present study 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of PsychologySame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207