MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimism and Attributional Retraining: Longitudinal Effects on Academic Achievement, Test Anxiety, and Voluntary Course Withdrawal in College Students<sup>1</sup>

2004· article· en· W2050537079 on OpenAlexaff
Joelle C. Ruthig, Raymond P. Perry, Nathan C. Hall, Steven Hladkyj

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Social Psychology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOptimism, Hope, and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptimismPsychologyTest anxietyAcademic achievementAnxietyTest (biology)Longitudinal studyPersistence (discontinuity)Clinical psychologyRetrainingDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A longitudinal study examined how optimism and attributional retraining (AR) influenced 256 first‐year college students' test anxiety, cumulative academic achievement, and course persistence in college over an academic year. Students' optimism was assessed at the start of the academic year and they were assigned to either an AR or no‐AR (control) condition. Measures of students' test anxiety, cumulative grade point average, and voluntary course withdrawal were obtained at the end of the academic year. Results suggest that although high optimism was an academic risk factor among students who did not receive AR, high‐optimism students who did receive the AR cognitive intervention benefited from its effects to a greater extent than did low‐optimism students.

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)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations146
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Social PsychologySame topicOptimism, Hope, and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207