MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396799922 · doi:10.1177/00332941241254323

Perceived Social Support and Connectedness in Non-Suicidal Self-Injury Engagement

2024· article· en· W4396799922 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda Simundic, Amanda Argento, Jessica Mettler, Nancy L. Heath

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSuicide and Self-Harm Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial connectednessPsychologySocial supportMediationFeelingSocial psychologyModerated mediationSocial engagementSuicide preventionDevelopmental psychologyPoison controlClinical psychologyMedical emergencyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perceived social support has been posited as an important factor in non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI) cessation. Although, previous research suggests that social connectedness is the mechanism through which perceived social support influences psychological wellbeing. Thus, the present study investigated whether social connectedness is the mechanism through which perceived social support functions to influence NSSI engagement. Fifty-six women with ( M age = 20.18, SD = 2.07) and 84 without ( M age = 20.24, SD = 1.98) a history of NSSI completed online measures of perceived social support and social connectedness. A mediation model was conducted with social connectedness in the relation between perceived social support from family, friends, and significant others and NSSI engagement. Findings revealed that social connectedness fully explained the relation between perceived social support from all sources and NSSI engagement. The results suggest that the relation between perceived social support and NSSI engagement is fully explained by the degree to which individuals report feeling connected to others. Implications for future research and practice will be discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ReportsSame topicSuicide and Self-Harm StudiesFrench-language works237,207