Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, there are no well-studied models of how to incorporate Islamic religious coping strategies into the clinical encounter.Adam and Ward's study, "Stress, Religious Coping, and Wellbeing in Acculturating Muslims", provides therapists and researchers further consideration of the role of Islam in counseling Muslims.In spite of the positive association between religious coping and higher life satisfaction, there was no association between religious coping and psychological symptoms.This negative finding is important for researchers who are interested in incorporating Islamic coping practices in counseling to consider and build upon; when appropriate, the Journal of Muslim Mental Health publishes negative studies to prevent publication bias that favors the role of spirituality in emotional health.However, the negative finding may be due to the relatively healthy sample of participants of the study as well as the tight range of psychological wellbeing scores.Furthermore, the study is crosssectional and was not designed to test interventions that integrate religious coping to improve psychological symptom scores.Clinicians may find psychometric scales, and/or the constructs of the scales, such as the Muslim Religious Coping scale useful to better understand how their clients cope with stressful life events.Sexual health in Muslim communities is another topic that is grossly understudied.Ali-Faisal, in her study "What's Sex Got to Do with It?The Role of Sexual Experience in the Sexual Attitudes, and Sexual Guilt and Anxiety of Young Muslim Adults in Canada and the United States", offers an important contribution to the field.She demonstrates that Muslim adults who reported having premarital sex were less likely to report feeling anxiety and guilt about sex.Although the majority (79%) of her 403 participants are female, she was able recruit an ethnically diverse group of participants.Approximately the same percentage of her sample of Muslim men and women reported having sex before marriage (37.8% of women and 31.7% of men surveyed), which is significantly lower than proportions reported among other North Americans.Ali-Faisal concludes that participants who engaged in premarital sex held more liberal views about sex and had less sexual guilt and anxiety.Unfortunately, religiosity and acculturation was not measured in this group and the role of religion, traditional values, and acculturation on sexual attitudes would be purely
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".