MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050487065 · doi:10.1177/0739986309336845

Psychological Coping and Well-Being of Male Latino Undergraduates

2009· article· en· W2050487065 on OpenAlexaff
Alberta M. Gloria, Jeanett Castellanos, Nicholas C. Scull, Francisco Villegas

Bibliographic record

VenueHispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionCoping (psychology)Social psychologySelf-esteemDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined 100 male Latino undergraduates' cultural self-esteem, perceived educational barriers, cultural fit, coping responses (CRs), and subsequent well-being within higher education. The most commonly reported CR for Latino males was to actively find out more about the situation and take a positive planned action. Assessing group mean differences, a class standing by generation interaction revealed that first-generation lower division and first-generation upper division students reported higher perceptions of barriers to staying in school than second-generation lower division and second-generation upper division students, respectively. Similarly, examining differences of coefficients, the strength of the relationship of perceptions of barriers to staying in school and psychological well-being was significantly stronger for the first-generation than second-generation male students Cultural congruity and emotion-focused coping were most predictive of psychological well-being; however, perception of barriers to staying in school was consistently evident in understanding male Latino undergraduates' educational experiences.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Citations110
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHispanic Journal of Behavioral SciencesSame topicHigher Education Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207