MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210464392 · doi:10.1002/jcop.22807

The impact of social media coverage on attitudes towards mental illness and violent offending

2022· article· en· W4210464392 on OpenAlexafffund
Anthony M. Battaglia, Мини Mамак, Joel O. Goldberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster UniversityYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMental illnessPsychologySocial distanceStigma (botany)CommitContext (archaeology)Schizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PerceptionPsychiatryMental healthClinical psychologyMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study is to better understand stigma towards individuals with mental illness who commit violent offences, and examine ways to mitigate the negative impact of social media news stories of schizophrenia and violent offending. Psychology undergraduate students (N = 255) were exposed to Instagram images and captions of recent real news stories of violent offending by individuals with schizophrenia. In the experimental condition, contextual clinical explanatory information was integrated. Pre- and post-measures of stigma were completed. There was a significant increase in negative attitudes towards individuals with mental illness who committed violent offences following the no-context condition, which was clearly mitigated in the experimental condition where context was provided. In both conditions, there were significant increases in intended social-distancing behaviours towards and perceptions of dangerousness of individuals with schizophrenia, and negative beliefs about mental illness more generally. There appears to be utility in incorporating knowledge-based clinical information to mitigate some facets of stigma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community PsychologySame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207