The Association Between Stress, Discrimination, and Hope Among Youth Experiencing Homelessness: Social Support as a Buffer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Homelessness is associated with a variety of stressors, including safety concerns, and uncertainty about the future as well as stigmatization, that can lead to or exacerbate pre-existing physical and mental health issues. This study explores the association between stress, hope, stigmatization, and social support among youth experiencing homelessness. Method: Quantitative, cross-sectional survey data were collected on n = 100 youth between the ages of 18 - 29 (60% identified as men, 28% as women, and 10% as transgender/gender diverse) experiencing homelessness in New York City. Result: Transgender or gender-diverse youth reported lower levels of hope and social support compared to the rest of the sample. Additionally, participants identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) reported higher levels of professional support than heterosexual-identifying participants. Further analysis revealed a correlation between longer length of homelessness and less perceived social support. Finally, the association between discrimination, stress and hope was weaker for respondents with higher levels of social support quantity and quality, respectively. Conclusion: The results suggest that social support is an essential protective factor from both street-based stress and discrimination. It is vital to facilitate adequate support to youth experiencing homelessness, especially for the gender-diverse youth who report lower levels of hopefulness.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".