MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388461115 · doi:10.1177/13591053231207294

Gender roles and gender norms associated with psychological distress in women and men among the Dutch general population

2023· article· en· W4388461115 on OpenAlexaff
Paula M.C. Mommersteeg, Irene G. M. van Valkengoed, Paul Lodder, Robert‐Paul Juster, Nina Kupper

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Psychology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersZonMw
KeywordsMasculinityPsychologyFemininityClinical psychologyAnxietyDistressNorm (philosophy)Gender rolePopulationPsychological distressDepressive symptomsDevelopmental psychologyDemographyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women report more psychological distress than men, which may be related to both biological sex and socio-cultural gender. We tested whether associations between gender and distress differ for women and men. The cross-sectional sample consisted of 678 Dutch people (54% women). Gender roles were assessed as masculinity and femininity. A composite gender norm score was calculated by summing gendered sociodemographics. Multivariate regressions examined sex, gender, and their interaction for depressive symptoms, anxiety, and perceived stress, additionally adjusted. Women reported more psychological distress. People scoring higher on masculine gender roles, but not feminine gender roles, reported lower psychological distress. A higher gender norm score was related to more depressive symptoms and perceived stress. This association was only present in men and was explained by health-related covariates. This research shows that there is a need to further elaborate on the discrepancies between sex and gender in health psychology research to better understand individual differences.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.330 · 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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Health PsychologySame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207