MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311137250 · doi:10.1177/07308884221129520

A Forced Vacation? The Stress of Being Temporarily Laid Off During a Pandemic

2022· article· en· W4311137250 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueWork and Occupations · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)DistressPandemicMental healthPsychologyMeaning (existential)Affect (linguistics)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Stress (linguistics)Social psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicineHistoryPsychotherapistDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A million Canadian workers suddenly became temporarily laid off (TLO) early into the pandemic. How did this affect mental health? Guided by the Stress Process Model (SPM), we would expect that this job disruption should increase psychological distress. However, given the unique context surrounding the early period of the pandemic, we advance the forced vacation hypothesis, which argues that those who became TLO would—at least initially—report lower levels of distress. To address this puzzle, we use a mixed-methods approach combining a national longitudinal survey dataset and in-depth interviews. Our quantitative analyses reveal that individuals who were TLO had lower distress in April 2020 compared with their peers who continued working. Our interviews uncover several potential explanations for these patterns. The findings provide an elaboration to the SPM as the pandemic context altered the meaning of being TLO, making it feel like a “forced vacation”—at least initially.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.327 · 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