An Investigation into Ambiguity Tolerance in Iranian Senior EFL Undergraduates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed to explore how tolerant of ambiguity Iranian EFL learners at university level are and if gender plays a role in this regard. To this end , upon filling in the revised SLTAS scale of ambiguity tolerance 194 male and female Iranian teacher trainees were assigned to three ambiguity tolerance groups; namely, high, moderate and low. Cluster analysis of the SLTAS scores indicated that Iranian EFL learners were mostly moderate as far as tolerance of ambiguity was concerned. Examining the gender differences through an independent sample t-test manifested that female participants were less tolerant of ambiguity than their male peers. Also, the differences between the expected and observed number of participants categorized in the three AT groups were non-significant undermining the role of gender as a moderator variable in assigning participants to AT groups and further approving of SLTAS validity. Implications for classroom practice are presented in the light of findings. The results are helpful in syllabus design and teaching methodology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".