Spanish Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory Construction and Validity among Higher Education Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. The study of Time Orientation (TO) has been focused on how to measure this construct and its effects on human behavior. Defined as a fundamental psychological variable, TO is multidimensional, sensible to cultural differences and age. Although its relation to learning, it deserves further study in the different Higher Education (HE) modalities (onsite, blended and online).Method. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) is used in a sample of 250 HE learners enrolled in online, blended and onsite institutions, to compare the results of the ZTPI in the particular population of HE students in relation with the previous studies in English and those using the ZTPI Spanish release among a general population sample. Also, Confirmatory Factorial Analysis (CFA) is conducted among a different sample (n=316) in order to discuss the external validity of the instrument.Results. The factorial structure study of the ZTPI in Spanish among HE students revealed 5 factors, with a similar item classification of the previous study of the Spanish release and an acceptable internal reliability for each factor. Furthermore, the study of TO in relation to age for students in three different university modalities showed significant differences for past and future orientations and present hedonism when compared with previous research, culturan aspects are discussed. In general, the ZTPI in Spanish is a reliable instrument for measuring the students’ TO, and this psychological trait is significantly related to age and university modality.Discussion. Our results could give a first, indicative direction for helping institutions adapting their offer of online, onsite and blended courses to the different students’ profiles, based on their TO. Moreover, differences shown among contexts could also guide prospective HE students to choose the best fitted HE modality according to their TO.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".