Anxiety, Optimism and Academic Achievement among Students of Private Medical and Engineering Colleges: A Comparative Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Courses related to medical and engineering fields are quite extensive and demanding, which often lead to stress and anxiety among students. As optimism was hypothesized to reduce anxiety and enhance academic achievement, the purpose of the current study was to assess the level of anxiety and its relation with optimism and academic achievement among medical and engineering students. Since these two courses differ in many aspects and the gender roles in the society are changing, the secondary objective of the study was to find differences in anxiety, optimism and academic achievement across genders and academic majors. A total of 346 students (171 medical and 175 engineering) from 3 medical and 4 engineering colleges of Uttar Pradesh, India participated in the study. Academic results of the latest two semesters were considered as academic achievement of the students, whereas anxiety and optimism were tested using Sinha’s Comprehensive Anxiety Test (SCAT, 2007), and Learned Optimism Scale (LOS, 2000) respectively. Both measures are constructed and standardized on Indian students. Results revealed that anxiety had a significant negative relationship with optimism and academic achievement, whereas a significant positive relationship was found between optimism and academic achievement. Significant differences were revealed between medical and engineering students, but the gender differences in the variables under study were insignificant. The results of this study provide insights for faculty members and institutions for better academic performance of the students.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it