Relationship between Psychological Empowerment and Spiritual Intelligence with Marital Satisfaction in Female and Male Teachers in Ahvaz
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study was aimed to examine the relationship between psychological empowerment and spiritual intelligence with marital satisfaction in male and female teachers in Ahvaz from 2014 to 2015. Hence, 350 teachers were selected using random-stratified sampling method. Research tools were Spriters' psychological empowerment questionnaire (1995), Badie's et al. spiritual intelligence questionnaire (2010), Enrich's marital satisfaction questionnaire (1997); in order to do analysis, a Pearson Correlation Coefficient method and a regression method was used. Results showed that there is a relationship between psychological empowerment and spiritual intelligence with marital satisfaction in male and female teachers in Ahvaz. The results obtained from multi-fold regression analysis, using step-by-step method, showed that effectiveness, spiritual intelligence, and significance are able to predict marital satisfaction significantly. In addition, psychological empowerment has a closer relationship with spiritual intelligence, and spiritual intelligence has a closer relationship with marital satisfaction.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 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".