Meaning making in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: effects of purpose in life, positive reframing, acceptance, and event appraisal
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a continuously changing world, we are confronted with stressors that may have negative impacts on well-being across our lifespan. Consequently, having and preserving internal psychological resources is important. In Park and Folkman’s meaning making model, purpose in life may guide individuals through meaning making processes when stressful age-graded events are encountered. Based on this model, we tested the role of purpose in life in the context of COVID-19 in two samples of emerging adults. First, a cross-sectional structural equation model (SEM) showed that there was an indirect effect of purpose in life on distress, via adaptive appraisal of the event and greater engagement in positive reframing. Second, a longitudinal SEM indicated that across an 8-month period, acceptance and positive reframing predicted purpose, and changes in purpose mediated the relation between using acceptance at T1 and maintenance of purpose at T3. Implications for the meaning making model are 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it