Effects of Stress, Social Support, Experience of Shame, and Loss of Face on Mental Health of Chinese Immigrant Mothers of Children with Developmental Disabilities in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social factors such as stress and social support impact mental health and might be associated with cultural factors such as feelings of shame and loss of face. Methods: This quantitative study examined sixty-five Chinese immigrant mothers of children with developmental disabilities (DDs) from the Great Toronto Area in Canada. Data was gathered through the following scales: Parental Stress Index-short Form, Oslo Social Support scale, Experience of Shame Scale, Loss of Face Questionnaire, Social Interaction Anxiety Scale and Social Phobia Scale, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Short Depression Scale, and General Self-efficacy Scale. Findings: Correlational analyses confirmed that shame was positively correlated significantly with loss of face (r=.43**), social anxiety (r=.62**), social phobia (r=.38**), and depression (r=.66**). Social support was negatively correlated significantly with depression (r=-.28**), self-efficacy was negatively correlated with social phobia (r=-.21**). Loss of face was positively correlated significantly with anxiety (r=.36**) and depression (r=.43**). Regression analyses indicated that shame (Z= 4.44***) and loss of face (Z= 2.36*) were the strongest mediators of effects of anxiety on mothers’ depression. Discussion: Implications are discussed with regard to providing efficient services for the families with their specific cultural backgrounds and optimizing their mental health and well-being. Conclusions: These empirical findings confirmed that Chinese immigrant mothers of children with DDs experienced more depression, when they had more feelings of shame, loss of face, and anxieties. This study highlighted the impact of social and cultural factors on the mental health of Chinese immigrant mothers of children with DDs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".