MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414534284 · doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcaf190

Understanding the association between everyday discrimination and self-esteem among young adults: Mediating role of personality traits

2025· article· en· W4414534284 on OpenAlexaff
In Young Park, Euijin Jung, Brian K. Lo, Hyunji Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueThe British Journal of Social Work · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRacial and Ethnic Identity Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConscientiousnessAssociation (psychology)NeuroticismPersonalityBig Five personality traitsPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study aimed to examine the association between perceived everyday discrimination and self-esteem and whether this relationship can be mediated by personality traits among young adults. Data were drawn from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics Transition into Adulthood supplement (n = 1,288). Structural Equation Modeling path analysis was used to examine the association between everyday discrimination, personality traits, and self-esteem. The results showed that elevated everyday discrimination was significantly associated with lower self-esteem (b = −0.23, P < .001), and this association was mediated by neuroticism (effects = −0.157; P < .001) and conscientiousness (effects = −0.334; P < .001). These findings underscore the importance of incorporating personality-focused strategies in interventions designed to mitigate adverse effects of everyday discrimination on young adults. School and community-based programs can play a significant role in reducing negative impacts of discrimination and fostering young adults’ self-esteem.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe British Journal of Social WorkSame topicRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchFrench-language works237,207