ACADEMIC STRESS: ITS CAUSES AND RESULTS AT A UGANDAN UNIVERSITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study examined academic stress, study habits and academic performance of 196 (113 males and 83 females) undergraduates of Mbarara University of Science and Technology in Uganda using a cross-sectional survey research design. Findings showed that daily academic hassles were found to be the most stressful (M = 3.11; SD = 0.96) while personal problems were reported as the least stressful (M = 2.27; SD = 0.86). First year students experienced greater academic stress from financial hardships (χ2 = 10.71; p = .03), academic overload/time (χ2 = 10.23; p = .04) and social expectations (χ2 = 10.79; p = .01) than the continuing students. Motivation was the most used study habit (M = 6.52; SD = 1.18) among the respondent, while studying a chapter was the least common study habit (M = 3.86; SD = 1.35) among the students. Faculty of Development Studies students had better study habits (χ2 = 8.75; p = .03) than other faculties/institute based on grade performance. The GPA/CGPA 4.40 - 5.00 category had superior study habits (χ2 = 11.47; p = .01) than the other GPA/CGPA categories. Age (OR =. 88) was a significant predictor of having supplementary exams. Our results highlight the need for strategic interventions focusing on reducing academic stressors and improving the study habits of the undergraduates considering the uniqueness of the different faculties and year of study for improved academic performance.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".