MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987618207 · doi:10.1375/ajgc.19.1.56

Validation of an Australian Academic Stress Questionnaire

2009· article· en· W1987618207 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natasha Lakaev

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Guidance and Counselling · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStress (linguistics)PsychologyClinical psychologyScale (ratio)Extraversion and introversionPersonalitySocial psychologyBig Five personality traitsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The aim of the study was to establish the Lakaev Academic Stress Response Scale (LASRS; Lakaev, 2006) as a valid and reliable measure of stress responses. The sample consisted of 375 Bond University students from several countries (142 Australia, 5 New Zealand, 68 United States, 8 Canada, 65 Asian, 66 Europe and 21 other) and from various levels of tertiary education (266 undergraduate and 109 postgraduate). Participants completed six self-report questionnaires that related to, acculturative stress, somatic stress symptoms, academic stress, stress responses, extraversion and general stress in order to determine convergent and divergent validity. The LASRS was shown to have sound psychometric properties and was suggested to be a sound way of measuring academic stress responses, particularly for Australian students. The results are discussed in terms of past tertiary academic stress research and suggestions for future investigations.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.366 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations28
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Guidance and CounsellingSame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207