ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Suicidal Distress and Daily Well-Being: A New Model of Social Hysteresis.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Social acceleration and recurrent structural shocks increase habitus-field mismatch, yet similar exposure does not produce uniform trajectories of daily well-being or suicidal distress. This paper asks how comparable structural strain can generate divergent, path-dependent outcomes and why suicidal vulnerability may persist after objective conditions improve. We develop a theory-building, concept-driven framework that integrates Bourdieu's practice theory with social and behavioural scholarship on stress, anomie, and despair, and conceptualises these dynamics as social hysteresis. The regime-based model specifies two ideal-typical response orientations through which mismatch can stabilise: an anomic regime marked by shame, withdrawal, and inwardly directed harm, and a radicalising regime marked by grievance framing, moral indignation, and organised participation, without implying violent extremism. Represented through hysteresis loops, the framework implies multistability, asymmetric switching thresholds, and scarring, providing a mechanism for persistence and non-linearity in distress trajectories. The model derives testable expectations for longitudinal panel and experience-sampling designs and suggests that prevention and intervention design should combine reductions in mismatch with relational and institutional infrastructures that facilitate regime shifts and reopen the space of possibles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.