Impact of Locus of Control Expectancy on Level of Well-Being
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 paper investigates the impact of locus of control, a psychological social learning theory that is rigorously researched for its implications on leadership qualities, on the level of happiness of an individual. The primary research strategy employed was the survey strategy. Participants were asked to fill in a questionnaire that was designed to test, amongst other variables, their locus of control and level of happiness. The Spearman Rank Correlation hypothesis test was used to test the data for significance and strength of the relationship. As a secondary research approach, self-reflection documents written by research participants, on the topic of locus of control, were used to add personal expression to the discussion of the quantitative results. While academic literature vastly supports the view that leadership qualities are predominantly present in those with an internal locus of control, our research results conclude that a maximum level of happiness is achieved by individuals with a balanced locus of control expectancy – a mix of internal and external locus of control, alternatively known as ‘bi-local expectancy’.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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