Exploring Voluntary Disclosure of Non‐Suicidal Self‐Injury: A Thematic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Voluntary disclosure of Non‐Suicidal Self‐Injury (NSSI) refers to instances when an individual chooses to share with another person that they have self‐injured. To date, the processes involved in deciding to disclose NSSI are not well understood from a lived experience perspective. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore lived experience perspectives of the decision to voluntarily disclose NSSI. Fifteen semi‐structured interviews were conducted with university students who were aged between 18 and 25 ( M = 20.33, SD = 1.88), with 11 identifying as female. All participants had previously disclosed their NSSI to at least one other person. The interview transcripts were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Several themes were identified including: The Value of Trust in Disclosure, Take Context into Account, Support for one and for all, Disclosing in the face of fear, Selective Sharing, and Perceptions of Disclosure. The findings of this study highlight the multifaceted and ongoing nature of voluntary NSSI disclosure decision‐making. In particular, NSSI disclosure decision‐making was grounded within a strong value system and shaped by proximal as well as distal contextual factors. The opportunity to receive support or to help others appears of particular importance, despite significant barriers to NSSI disclosure.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".