Hot, cold, or both? A person-centered perspective on death awareness during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic-as an omnipresent mortality cue-heightens employees' awareness of their mortality and vulnerability. Extant research has identified two distinct forms of death awareness: death anxiety and death reflection. Because researchers have exclusively examined death anxiety and death reflection as independent and unique variables across individuals while overlooking their interplay and co-existence within individuals, we know little about whether and why employees can have different combined experiences of two forms of death awareness over a certain period of time (e.g., during the pandemic), and how these different employee experiences relate to theoretically and practically important work-relevant consequences. To address this gap in our knowledge, we adopted a person-centered approach using latent profile analysis to consider death anxiety and death reflection conjointly within employees during the COVID-19 pandemic. Across two studies, we identified three distinct death awareness profiles-the disengaged, calm reflectors, and anxious reflectors-and found membership in these profiles systematically varied according to health- (e.g., risk of severe illness from COVID-19), work- (e.g., job-required human contact), and community-related (e.g., the number of regional infections) factors influencing the self-relevance of COVID-19 as a mortality cue. In addition, we found that these death awareness profiles differentially predicted important employee outcomes, including well-being (i.e., depression and emotional exhaustion) and prosocial behaviors at work (i.e., organizational citizenship behaviors and pro-diversity behavior). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".