MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994490316 · doi:10.4236/psych.2014.512156

The Subjective Well-Being of Malaysian School Children: Grade Level, Gender and Ethnicity

2014· article· en· W1994490316 on OpenAlexafffund
Mitchell Clark, H. S. Amar-Singh, Nor Hazlina Hashim

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
FundersMount Royal University
KeywordsHappinessPsychologyLife satisfactionEthnic groupDevelopmental psychologyWell-beingSubjective well-beingSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study explores the subjective well-being of Malaysian children between 12 and 14 years of age. These children are beginning the transition from childhood to adulthood. They are confronted by a range of social and developmental influences that impact their self concept, self esteem, independence skills and their sense of their personal well-being. Responses on the Personal Wellbeing Index (School Children) were collected from over a thousand children in Form 1 and Form 2 grade levels drawn from a sample of ten schools in Ipoh, Malaysia. The results for the sample as a whole range from the lowest average score in “happiness with life achievement” at 68.1 up to a score of 80.7 on the “personal relationships” domain out of a total possible score of 100. Significant differences between the male and female participants were noted with males rating their subjective well-being as higher than the ratings by females on their “satisfaction with life as a whole” as well as their happiness with “personal safety”. The younger students (Form 1 gradelevel) rated their happiness as significantly higher on the majority of life domains as compared to Form 2 students. There was also a significant difference between the students attending Chinese schools and those attending non-Chinese “National” schools. While those attending Chinese schools rated themselves substantially higher in regard to their happiness with “achievement in life”, those in the other schools rated themselves higher on most of the other domains as well as significantly higher on “satisfaction with life as a whole”. The strongest associations with “life as a whole” included “standard of living”, “personal safety” and “future security”.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.378
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychologySame topicEducation and Islamic StudiesFrench-language works237,207