Effects of context on perceptions of the language of suicide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. There is concern regarding use of the phrase ‘committed suicide’, given its connotations of immorality. Limited research has examined influences on people’s use of this phrase. The current studies examined whether portraying a suicide as highly immoral affects perceptions of the phrase ‘committed suicide’.Method. Undergraduate participants in western Canada read a suicide vignette in which the suicide was depicted either neutrally or as sinful (Study 1, N = 188) or as either altruistic or vengeful (Study 2, N = 204). They then judged, from the perspective of the deceased person’s family, the preference for statements employing ‘committed suicide’ or ‘died by suicide’ (Study 1) or the acceptability of statements employing ‘committed suicide’, ‘ended her[his] life’, ‘took her[his] own life’, or ‘died by suicide’ (Study 2).Results. In Study 1, ‘committed suicide’ statements received higher preference judgments for the scenario depicted as sinful. In Study 2, phrases alternative to ‘committed suicide’ received higher acceptability ratings for the altruistic scenario.Discussion. We consider limitations of our work, directions for future research on the language of suicide, and implications of our findings.
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 | 0.003 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".