A Cross-Cultural Validation of the Learning-Related Boredom Scale (LRBS) With Canadian and Chinese College Students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the psychometric properties of the Learning-Related Boredom Scale (LRBS) from the Academic Emotions Questionnaire (AEQ; Pekrun, Goetz, & Perry, 2005; Pekrun, Goetz, Titz, & Perry, 2002) in a sample of 405 university students from Canada and China. Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the factor structure and measurement invariance of the LRBS across cultural settings, after which the relationships between the LRBS, boredom frequency in class, intrinsic motivation, and self-efficacy for self-regulated learning (SESRL) were examined. Results showed evidence of reliability and measurement invariance of the LRBS, and the relationships between the LRBS, boredom frequency, and SESRL were similar across settings. The study thus provided evidence that learning-related boredom is a valid construct across culturally diverse school settings and supported the use of the LRBS in both Canadian and Chinese student populations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it