The Effectiveness of Group Assertiveness Training on Happiness in Rural Adolescent Females With Substance Abusing Parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Parental substance abuse confronts children with a variety of psychological, social, and behavioral problems. Children of substance abusing parents show higher levels of psychiatric disorders including anxiety and depression and exert lower levels of communication skills. Weak social skills in this group of adolescents put them at a higher risk for substance abuse. Many studies showed school based interventions such as life skill training can effective on future substance abusing in these high risk adolescences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The participants consisted of 57 middles schools girls, all living in rural areas and having both parents with substance dependency. The participants were randomly assigned to intervention (n=28) and control (n=29) groups. The data were collected before and six weeks after training in both group. The intervention group received eight sessions of group assertiveness training. Participants were compared in terms of changes in scores on the Oxford Happiness Questionnaire and the Gambrills-Richey Assertion Inventory. RESULTS: The total score for happiness change from 43.68 ±17.62 to 51.57 ±16.35 and assertiveness score changed from 110.33±16.05 to 90.40±12.84. There was a significant difference in pretest-posttest change in scores for intervention (7.89±4.13) and control (-2.51±2.64) groups; t (55) =2.15, p = 0.049. These results suggest that intervention really does have an effect on happiness and assertiveness. CONCLUSION: Determining the effectiveness of these school based interventions on other life aspects such as substance abuse calls for further study on these rural adolescent girls.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".