MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161379445 · doi:10.1037/a0034022

Generalized self-efficacy, positive cognitions, and negative cognitions as mediators of the relationship between conscientiousness and meaning in life.

2014· article· en· W2161379445 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Owen Richard Lightsey, Güler Boyraz, Audrey Ervin, Eli B. Rarey, George Gharibian Gharghani, David Maxwell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Traits and Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyConscientiousnessMeaning (existential)CognitionSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPersonalityClinical psychologyBig Five personality traitsPsychotherapistExtraversion and introversion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Meaning in life (MIL) is a core construct in eudaimonic theories of well-being and an important predictor of physical and psychological health. Although many studies have found that the personality variable conscientiousness has a particular strong relationship to MIL, the mechanisms underlying this relationship have not been examined. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that the conscientiousness–MIL relationship would be mediated by generalized self-efficacy beliefs and, hence, more positive and fewer negative automatic cognitions. Measures of these constructs were administered to 273 college student volunteers recruited from a larger pool of students in classes and via e-mail solicitation, and the model was analyzed using structural equation modelling. As hypothesized, generalized self-efficacy, positive thoughts, and negative thoughts fully mediated the conscientiousness–MIL relationship. The model accounted for 45% of the variance in MIL, 34% of the variance in positive thoughts, 27% of the variance in negative thoughts, and 35% of the variance in generalized self-efficacy. These results suggest that conscientiousness shapes MIL through raising generalized self-efficacy, increasing frequency of positive thoughts, and decreasing frequency of negative thoughts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.203 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations33
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportementSame topicPersonality Traits and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207