MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2469840681 · doi:10.1177/2167696816657233

The Unique Associations of Academic Experiences With Depressive Symptoms in Emerging Adulthood

2016· article· en· W2469840681 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah E. Newcomb-Anjo, Rosanne Villemaire-Krajden, Katie Takefman, Erin T. Barker

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerging Adulthood · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisengagement theoryDepressive symptomsLonelinessDepression (economics)PsychologyClinical psychologyMultilevel modelSet (abstract data type)PsychiatryMedicineGerontologyAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research has shown that university students are at increased risk of developing depression and related symptoms. The goal of the present study was to examine whether academic experiences relate to depressive symptoms in emerging adults, over and above a set of established depression risk factors. Participants ( N = 903), ages 18–25 years, completed a series of questionnaires about risk factors for depression, academic experiences, and depressive symptoms. Results of a hierarchical multiple regression model showed that features of the academic experience were associated with depressive symptoms, over and above the effects of established risk factors. In particular, perceived academic stress, disengagement from studies, and loneliness at university were significant predictors of depressive symptoms. This research highlights the role of subjective academic experiences as potential risk factors for depressive symptoms in university 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.301 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations29
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerging AdulthoodSame topicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesFrench-language works237,207