An age and gender stratified interview on emotional experiences and coping of Chinese migrants in Canada amidst the pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic had a profound impact on psychological wellbeing. The current study aims to identify common emotional experiences and coping strategies among Chinese migrants in Canada based on a semi-structured interview with a purposive sample of 20 young (aged 21-34), 21 middle-aged (aged 42-57), and 20 older adults (aged 65-85). Each age group was approximately split in half by gender. The qualitative analysis of the data identified some common positive (e.g., self-oriented, other-oriented and situational) and negative emotional experiences (e.g., sadness, loneliness, fear, and anger) towards the pandemic. Coping strategies were categorized into three themes: behavioural (e.g., exercise, relaxation), social (e.g., social support), and cognitive (e.g., reappraisal). The supplementary quantitative analysis showed that women reported more negative than positive experiences, while older adults (women particularly) endorsed differentially more behavioural coping. This suggests that women are likely to be emotionally vulnerable and aging is likely to be associated with more adaptive coping among this population in the context of the pandemic.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".