MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012776867 · doi:10.5539/ass.v9n11p308

The Effects of Group Study Activities on the Reduction of Bullying Behaviors among Islamic Private School Students in Songkhla Province

2013· article· en· W2012776867 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kasetchai Laeheem

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPrince of Songkla University
KeywordsIslamPsychologySimple random sampleTest (biology)Social psychologyClinical psychologyMedical educationMedicineEnvironmental healthGeographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purposes of this study were to explore the effects of group study activities on the reduction of bullying behaviors among Islamic private school students in Songkhla Province. This experimental study was conducted with 200 students divided into two groups: 100 students in the experimental group and the other 100 students in the control group. They were selected through simple random sampling. The experimental group participated in group study activities while the control group participated in religious activities of their schools. The study employed a true experimental pretest-posttest design. The data collecting instrument was a risk bullying behavior screening form, and the data were analyzed by finding the mean, standard deviation, and using a t-test.The results of the study revealed that students who participated in group study activities and those participated in school religious activities were not different in their bullying behaviors. The students participating in group study activities had statistically less bullying behaviors than those participating in Islamic religious activities.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207