Retracted: Designing Positive Psychology Interventions for Social Media: Cross-Sectional Web-Based Experiment With Young Adults With Cancer
Post-publication record
OpenAlex flags this work as retracted, but it carries no matching Retraction Watch record in this frame.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Young adults (ages 18-39 years) with cancer face unique risks for negative psychosocial outcomes. These risks could be lessened with positive psychology interventions adapted for social media if intervention messages encourage intentions to do the activities and positive message reactions and if young adults with cancer perceive few downsides. Objective: This study aimed to assess whether social media messages from evidence-based positive psychology interventions encouraged intentions to do the intervention activities and intended positive message reactions, overall and among sociodemographic or cancer characteristic subgroups. We also aimed to identify perceived downsides of the activity that would negatively impact the interventions' feasibility. Methods: Young adults (ages 18-39 years, cancer diagnosis ages 15-39 years) were randomized to a between-persons web-based experiment. Participants viewed a social media message with social context cues (vs not) for 1 of 2 types of intervention (acts of kindness vs social connectedness). Participants reported intentions to do the activity, along with their perceived social presence in the message (how much they felt the sense of others) and forecasted positivity resonance (whether they would experience socially connected positive emotions when doing the activity), with 5-point items. Participants also reported their self-efficacy (how certain they can do the intervention activity) with a 0-100 item and potential downsides of the activity categorically. Results: More than 4 out of 5 young adults with cancer (N=396) reported they "somewhat" (coded as 3) to "extremely" (5) intended to do the intervention activity (336/396, 84.8%; mean ranged from 3.4-3.6, SD 0.9-1.0), perceived social presence in the messages (350/396, 88.4%; mean 3.8, SD 0.7), and forecasted positivity resonance (349/396, 88.1%; mean 3.8-3.9, SD 0.8). Participants reported having self-efficacy to complete the activity (mean 70.7% of possible 100%, SD 15.4%-17.2%). Most (320/396, 80.8%) did not think of the downsides of the interventions. Messages with social context cues (vs not) and both intervention types were rated similarly (all P>.05). Black young adults reported lower intentions, perceived social presence, and forecasted positivity resonance than White young adults (all P<.001). Participants in active treatment (vs completed) reported greater intentions to do the activities (P<.001). Conclusions: Positive psychology intervention messages adapted for social media were perceived as acceptable and feasible among young adults with cancer. The social media-based messages encouraged increasing one's social connectedness and performing acts of kindness. Young adults with cancer also predicted they would have feelings of positive social engagement (positivity resonance) when doing the interventions-the key ingredient for experiencing the health benefits of these activities. This study provides promising evidence for the development of age-appropriate, highly scalable interventions to improve psychosocial health among young adults with cancer.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".