MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308339792 · doi:10.22374/ijmsch.v5i2.79

Psychosocial Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic

2022· article· en· W4308339792 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Erin A. Casey, Jill C. Hoxmeier, Claire Willey‐Sthapit, Juliana Carlson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Men s Social and Community Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMasculinityPsychosocialPandemicPsychologyMultilevel modelReligiosityCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)IdeologyDemographyDemographic economicsSocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceMedicineEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and objective: Globally, men are at greater risk of mortality and serious physical consequences from COVID-19 infection than women, but are less impacted by the pandemic’s impact on labor force participation and increased childcare responsibilities. Outside of gender identity, however, it is unclear whether men’s beliefs about gender may be related to the kinds of COVID-19-related impacts they report. This study sought to describe the employment, income, and household responsibility-related impacts of the pandemic on a sample of young men in the U.S. and to examine relationships between the men’s gender ideologies and attitudes toward gender equity with self-reported stress impacts of the pandemic. Methods: The data are from an online survey of 481 young men from across the U.S. Measures included scales assessing masculinity ideology, modern sexism, support for traditional divisions of labor by gender, and attitudes toward gender equity. New items developed for this study assessed COVID-19-related changes in employment, household responsibilities, and childcare duties as well as levels of stress. Hierarchical regression examined the relative roles of demographic characteristics, changes in employment and household work, and gender-related attitudes on COVID-related stress. Results: Descriptive findings showed that under 50% of the men in the sample experienced negative COVIDrelated impacts on employment, but that a majority of the men reported at least some COVID-related stress. Results of the hierarchical regression suggest that higher levels of stress were predicted by having a minoritized sexual identity, less religiosity, experiencing employment or household responsibility-related changes, and not endorsing modern sexism or a traditional, gendered division of labor. Conclusions: Experiencing COVID-19-related stress was normative in this sample of young men. However, endorsing traditional notions of a gendered division of labor was slightly protective against higher levels of COVID-related stress. These findings add to existing evidence that gender analysis must be a central component of ongoing COVID-related policy and programming development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.419
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Men s Social and Community HealthSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207