MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109102815 · doi:10.1177/0829573508327307

Promoting Intrapersonal Qualities in Adolescents

2008· article· en· W2109102815 on OpenAlexaff
Yvonne Hindes, Keoma J. Thorne, Vicki L. Schwean, Anne McKeough

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrapersonal communicationPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Experiential learningEmotional intelligenceApplied psychologyMedical educationSocial psychologyClinical psychologyInterpersonal communicationPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the number of negative influences on youth and the resultant potential for adverse outcomes, it is crucial to support their positive development. Leadership training programs can promote the development of adaptive intrapersonal qualities. The Teen Leadership Breakthrough (TLB) program claims to create sustainable changes in youth using experiential activities, direct instruction, and feedback to teach leadership skills. This study evaluated the TLB program's efficacy in developing intrapersonal skills in 10th- and 11th-grade students. Participants were randomly assigned to a control or treatment group. Assessment of emotional intelligence and self-concept occurred prior to, immediately after, 6 weeks and 6 months following the intervention. Results indicated that the TLB program created sustainable changes emotional intelligence and self-concept. Although these results are encouraging, further research is needed to investigate the effectiveness of the TLB program in broader demographic groups and to examine different outcomes.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations22
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207