Effects of Self Managing Life Crisis Based on the Oriental towards Life Crisis and Well-being of Married Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objectives were: 1) to study the efficiency of Managing Life Crisis Program (MLCP) based on theoriental approach towards the self-perception of life crisis, 2) to investigate an interaction between psycho-socialcharacteristics (of neuroticism, self control and social support) and MLCP, and 3) to study the variablespredicting the well-being. Subjects, who scored high on self perception of life crisis, were mothers of sixthgraders. Using simple random sampling, 32 participants were selected as the experimental group and 40 as thecontrol group. Data was analyzed by MANOVA statistics and multiple regression. The results indicated thatafter training the experimental group who trained with MLCP, scored lower on the total perception of life crisis,emotion oriented coping, and adapting. These scores were statistically significant different at 0.05 level from thecontrol group. No interaction was observed among psycho-social characteristics and training program towardsthe self- perception of life crisis. Finally adapting, emotion oriented coping, and stress predicted the well-beingof participants at 41.1%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".