MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092040031 · doi:10.2196/21145

Young People’s Attitude Toward Positive Psychology Interventions: Thematic Analysis

2020· article· en· W3092040031 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Toni Michel, Franziska Tachtler, Petr Slovák, Geraldine Fitzpatrick

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsThematic analysisPsychological interventionPsychologyThematic mapPositive psychologyApplied psychologySocial psychologyPsychoanalysisSociologyQualitative researchSocial sciencePsychiatryGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Digital instantiations of positive psychology intervention (PPI) principles have been proposed to combat the current global youth mental health crisis; however, young people are largely not engaging with available resources. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to explore young people's attitudes toward various PPI principles to find ways of making digital instantiations of them more engaging. METHODS: We conducted an explorative workshop with 30 young people (aged 16-21 years). They rated and reviewed 29 common PPIs. Ratings and recorded discussions were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Some interventions were conflicting with young people's values or perceived as too difficult. Participants responded positively to interventions that fit them personally and allowed them to use their strengths. CONCLUSIONS: Values, context, strengths, and other personal factors are entangled with young people's attitudes toward digital instantiations of PPI principles.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.314 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207