MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983603479 · doi:10.2466/pr0.103.2.395-405

The Japanese Version of the Coping Orientation to Problems Expereinced: A Study of Japanese Schoolteachers

2008· article· en· W1983603479 on OpenAlexaff
Yasumasa Otsuka, Misato Takada, Ayako Suzuki, Sawako Tomotake, Akinori Nakata

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Reports · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCronbach's alphaInternal consistencyCoping (psychology)Confirmatory factor analysisClinical psychologyGoodness of fitApplied psychologyPsychometricsSocial psychologyStructural equation modelingStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To investigate the internal consistency reliability and three types of validity of the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE), a survey was conducted among 209 English schoolteachers in Japan. The Japanese version of the COPE Inventory was developed through a back-translation process. Cronbach coefficients alpha for the Japanese version were above .70 for all subscales except five, including Acceptance and Restraint, so internal consistencies for these five were insufficient. Goodness of fit indexes for a confirmatory factor analysis were acceptable except for the Comparative Fit Index. Scores on COPE subscales were significantly correlated with scores on other tests (29 of 75 correlations were in the expected directions). Further exploration is required for several subscales and for generalization to Japanese-speaking populations in careers other than teaching to ensure the Japanese version of the COPE will be useful in assessing coping strategies. Given the limitations, present data for Japanese teachers are encouraging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological ReportsSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207