Men’s mental health and the arts: perceived benefits and dynamics of engagement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arts engagement is gaining recognition as a non-clinical approach to promote mental health and well-being. However, the perceived utility of the arts to promote mental health among men with low socioeconomic status (SES) and how to best engage them is underexplored. This study explores the lived experiences of men with low SES who engage with the arts in Northern Ireland (n = 41). Data collected via focus groups (n = 5) and interviews (n = 11) were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis to inductively derive four themes. Theme 1 highlights how the arts facilitated friendship, a collective identity, peer support and a reason to socialize. Themes 2 and 3 explore how the arts enhanced self-esteem and emotional regulation by developing a routine, purpose, sense of mastery, a sense of catharsis through immersion in a soothing endeavour and an alternative outlet for self-expression. Theme 4 covers strategies that facilitate male engagement in the arts such as using a familiar space, delivering to an existing male group, framing the programme around male interests not health or creativity, building on existing strengths and capacities, enabling ownership, using tangible action-orientated activities, and being non-authoritative and flexible with delivery. This is one of the first studies to highlight the gendered dimensions in which men with low SES engage with and experience mental health benefits through arts engagement. This study points towards relevant theories to further understand the pathways between the arts and improved mental health among men which can inform development of tailored arts programmes for men.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".