Interpersonal and targeted rejection life stressors are proximal risk factors for suicidal ideation and behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Although life stressors are known risk factors for suicide, the specific stressor types that most strongly precipitate suicidal outcomes, and on what timescale, remain poorly understood. Based on existing theory, we investigated whether objectively rated interpersonal stressors, especially social and targeted rejection stressors, are proximally associated with increased likelihood of suicidal ideation and behavior. Method Using an objectively rated contextual threat interview to assess stressful life events, and a timeline followback procedure for assessing suicide-related outcomes, we examined how the severity of four types of acute life events (i.e. non-interpersonal, interpersonal without social rejection, social rejection without targeted rejection, and targeted rejection) were temporally associated with the likelihood of same-day and next-day suicidal ideation and behavior over 16 months in 143 young adults ( M age = 25.27, SD = 4.65) with recent suicidal ideation or behavior. Results After controlling for prior-day suicidal ideation and non-interpersonal stressors, daily within-person increases in interpersonal stressor severity were related to higher odds of same-day (but not next-day) suicidal ideation. Additionally, greater increases in targeted rejection severity were uniquely related to increased likelihood of both same-day and next-day suicidal behavior after controlling for prior-day suicidal behavior and other types of stressors. Conclusions Interpersonal stressors are strong, proximal risk factors for suicidal ideation and behavior, and these effects are particularly strong for targeted rejection life events. Clinicians should thus assess recent interpersonal and, especially, targeted rejection stressors when evaluating acute suicide risk, and may reduce such risk by helping patients stabilize and strengthen their social relationships.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".