Cultural, Spirit Scripts and Embodiment: A Study on Somatic Symptoms in Adolescent Depression Expression in East Asia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In contrast to Western adolescents, who characteristically utilise psychological terminology such as sadness or hopelessness to describe their depressive symptoms, East Asian adolescents more frequently present with physical symptoms, including headaches, stomachaches and fatigue. The present study investigates the cultural shaping of depressive expression among East Asian adolescents, with a particular focus on the phenomenon of somatization. The study draws on Kleinman's concept of “cultural language” of illness and the theory of cultural scripts to demonstrate how sociolinguistic and cultural norms restrict direct expression of negative emotions and instead promote bodily pathways as socially acceptable outlets. Comparative studies further underscore cross-cultural variations, with Canadian and American adolescents tending to verbalise emotional difficulties directly, while Chinese adolescents are more inclined to describe somatic discomfort. Moreover, the phenomenon of somatization is compounded by two interwoven factors: academic pressure and family expectations. These factors serve to reinforce the use of somatization as a coping strategy, particularly in instances where emotional disclosure is deemed to be culturally taboo. The analysis suggests that somatization should not be pathologised, but rather understood as a culturally embedded strategy for communication. The paper concludes with the proposal of culturally sensitive approaches to diagnosis, psychoeducation, and intervention, including the integration of creative expression and AI tools designed with cultural awareness. This study posits that somatization should be recognised as a cultural script, should not be overly pathologized and advocates for a more nuanced and equitable framework for adolescent mental health support in East Asian societies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".