Mindfulness, Stress, and Coping Among University Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A sample of 135 first-year university students living in residence completed questionnaires that measured individual differences in mindfulness, coping styles, and perceived stress. Findings revealed significant positive relationships between mindfulness and rational coping, and significant negative relationships with emotional and avoidant coping and perceived stress. Regression analyses revealed that avoidant coping and perceived stress predicted 38.2 % of the variance of mindfulness scores. Findings from this study improve our understanding of how mindfulness relates to coping styles, thereby suggesting po-tential ways to enhance counselling services and programming for first-year university students during the often difficult transition to university. résumé Un échantillon de 135 étudiants de première année d’université vivant en résidence ont rempli des questionnaires mesurant des différences individuelles d’attention, de styles d’adaptation et de stress perçu. Les résultats ont révélé d’importantes relations positives entre l’attention et l’adaptation rationnelle, et d’importantes relations négatives entre
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".