THE POWER OF SOCIAL AND MOTIVATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS FOR TEST‐ANXIOUS ADOLESCENTS’ ACADEMIC SELF‐REGULATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on cognitive evaluation theory (CET) and organismic integration theory (OIT) – both sub‐theories of self‐determination theory (SDT) – the present study examined whether the academic self‐regulation of youth with test anxiety can be strengthened through social and motivational relationships with peers and teachers. This study employed a large sample (N = 1088; MAge = 13.7) of early adolescents from secondary schools in Brandenburg, Germany. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the proposed associations. The results revealed a negative association between test anxiety and intrinsic motivation as well as test anxiety and identified regulation, which was fully mediated by teachers as positive motivators. Furthermore, both teachers as positive motivators as well as the teacher‐student relationship were found to be strong predictors of the self‐determined aspects of academic self‐regulation. Additionally, both peers as positive motivators and the student‐student relationship are essential for external self‐regulation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".