Perceived religious discrimination and mental health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Most knowledge on the health consequences of discrimination comes from studies on racial/ethnic minorities, and research on religious discrimination is rare. To address this gap in knowledge, we examine the relationship between religious discrimination and self-rated mental health (SRMH), focusing on the role of religious affiliation as well as religious participation and the importance of religion/spirituality. METHODS: = 27,104) from all 10 provinces. The outcome variable is SRMH. Using OLS regressions, we compare the consequences of religious discrimination across five major religious groups (Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, Jewish, and Muslim), controlling for racial status and other confounding variables, and examining moderating factors. RESULTS: Religious discrimination is harmful for the SRMH of all religious groups. Despite experiencing higher levels of religious discrimination, religious minorities have no worse SRMH than the Christian majority, with the exception of Buddhists, who fare worse. The magnitude of the relationship between religious discrimination and SRMH differs across religious groups. CONCLUSION: Religious discrimination is a threat to mental health, irrespective of religious affiliation. There is a need to disaggregate non-Christian groups into distinct groups in studies of religious discrimination.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".