Belittled, Avoided, Ignored, Denied: Assessing Forms and Consequences of Stigma Experiences of People With Mental Illness Martin Driessen, Ulrich Frommberger, and Patrick William Corrigan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing from theory and research on self-esteem as an important coping resource, this chapter hypothesizes that higher self-esteem would protect volunteers from the pernicious effects of stigma-by-association. In a longitudinal study of AIDS volunteers, higher anticipated stigma-by-association deterred the initiation of volunteerism for people with lower self-esteem. In a longitudinal study of AIDS volunteers, the chapter examines whether self-esteem moderates the impact of stigma-by-association at different points in the volunteer process, including on prospective volunteers who have yet to begin their service and active volunteers who provide assistance to HIV+ clients. To investigate stigma-by-association among AIDS volunteers, it adopts a theoretical perspective that utilizes a stress and coping framework. Self-esteem appears to be one key psychological resource for coping with stress. For example, Dion et al. found that the relation between experienced discrimination and psychological distress among Chinese people living in Canada was stronger for those lower in hardiness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".