MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4284881419 · doi:10.1177/00220221221109552

Meaning in Stressful Experiences and Coping Across Cultures

2022· article· en· W4284881419 on OpenAlexafffund
Li‐Jun Ji, Suhui Yap, Zhi Ao Mark Khei, Xinqiang Wang, Baorui Chang, Samantha Xiao Shang, Huajian Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCultural Differences and Values
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCoping (psychology)Cognitive reframingPsychologySocial psychologyMeaning (existential)Meaning-makingClinical psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report three studies to examine how culture may influence people’s tendency to see meaning in stressful experiences (MISE), as well as their coping responses. Using a newly developed MISE scale with established measurement invariance across both cultures, we found that Chinese participants were more likely than Euro-Canadians to see meaning in stressful experiences (Studies 1 and 2), to adopt acceptance and positive reframing coping styles (Study 1), and to respond more positively to the COVID-19 pandemic (Study 2). To establish a causal link between MISE and coping, we primed MISE in Study 3 with Chinese participants and found an increase in resilient coping. The research highlights the important roles of culture and meaning making in coping.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.399 · 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

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cross-Cultural PsychologySame topicCultural Differences and ValuesFrench-language works237,207