MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1944999030 · doi:10.47678/cjhe.v27i2/3.183304

The Effects of Social Psychological Variables and Gender on the Grade Point Averages and Educational Expectations of University Students: A Case Study

2017· article· en· W1944999030 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Rodney A. Clifton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Higher Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)PsychologyEducational attainmentSocial psychologyStructural equation modelingPoint (geometry)Social influenceDevelopmental psychologyVariablesStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper uses a social psychological model to examine the educational attainment and expectations of 569 male and female Education students enrolled in a major university in Western Canada. Structural equation modeling was used to examine the effects of gender on six social psychological variables (positive affect, negative affect, interaction with students, interaction with professors, motivation, and self-concept of ability) and the effects of gender and the social psychological variables on the students' grade point averages and educational expectations. In comparison with males, females had higher positive affect and more positive motivation. Two of the social psychological variables, self-concept of ability and interaction with students, had strong effects on grade point average and slightly weaker effects on educational expectations. When the interaction effects of gender and the social psychological variables were added to the analyses, slight increases in the explained variance in grade point average and educational expectations were evident. Females had slightly higher grade point averages than males and males had slightly higher educational expectations than females.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.375 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Higher EducationSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207