MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414592679 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/gvkej_v1

The Role of Environmental Contexts on Impacts of Gender Minority Stress

2025· article· en· W4414592679 on OpenAlexaff
Tara Raessi, Alexandra Uhrig, Sarah S. Dermody

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Psychological Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStressorAffect (linguistics)Context (archaeology)Multilevel modelSocial environmentAssociation (psychology)Social stressSocial support

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Individuals who identify as transgender and gender diverse (TGD) often experience unique stressors associated with their TGD identity, referred to as gender minority stress (GMS), which can increase negative affect. This study examined whether social (i.e., when alone, with close others, with strangers/acquaintances) and environmental (i.e., at home, out-of-home) context was related to the likelihood of experiencing GMS and whether social and environmental context moderated the relationship between GMS and negative affect.Methods: This is a secondary analysis of ecological momentary assessment (EMA) data from 25 TGD adults who randomly received brief surveys twice daily for 21 days (N = 1,050 observations analyzed). Participants reported where they were, who they were with, GMS they recently experienced, and their current level of negative affect. Using multilevel models, we examined whether GMS was more likely to be experienced in specific contexts, whether GMS predicted negative affect, and if these contexts moderated the association between GMS and negative affect. Results: Participants were significantly more likely to experience a proximal gender minority stressor when they were out-of-the-home alone (compared to home alone), and when they were with non-close others (compared to close others). Social and environmental context significantly moderated the within-person association between GMS and negative affect. GMS was positively associated with negative affect for when participants were home alone but not when out-of-the-home alone. Conclusions: Social and environmental context may impact GMS experiences and subsequent negative affect, and should be considered in related interventions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207