The role of housing stability in predicting social capital: Exploring social support and psychological integration as mediators for individuals with histories of homelessness and vulnerable housing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social capital is a collective asset important for individual and population well-being. Individuals who experience homelessness may face barriers in accessing social capital due to health challenges, small social networks, and social exclusion. Data from a 4-year longitudinal study was used to determine if housing stability predicted greater social capital and if this relationship was mediated by social support and psychological integration for a sample of 855 homeless and vulnerably housed participants living in three Canadian cities. Findings showed that housing stability was not associated with trust and linking social capital. However, higher levels of social support and psychological integration had a mediating effect on the association between housing stability and trust and linking social capital. These findings highlight the importance of social support and psychological integration as means of promoting social capital for people who experience homelessness and vulnerable housing. Social interventions for housed individuals with histories of homelessness may be an avenue to foster greater social capital by building relationships with neighbors and connections to community resources and activities.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".