MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2499201216 · doi:10.1080/1364436x.2016.1207617

Configurations of student Spirituality/Religiosity: evidence from a Philippine university

2016· article· en· W2499201216 on OpenAlexaff
Rito Baring, Romeo Lee, Madelene Sta. Maria, Yan Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Children s Spirituality · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReligiositySpiritualityPsychosocialPsychologyMindsetReligious identitySocial psychologyIdentity (music)MedicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the points of contention in youth research pertains to academic life vis-a-vis the religious and spiritual mindset of the young student. Questions about the probable associations between academic growth and spiritual/religious life are treated with intense interest in religious and sociological discussions. This study sought to find out the characteristics of Filipino student Spirituality and Religiosity using the Religiosity and Spirituality Scale for Youth from a sample of 3108 college students in a Manila-based Philippine university. It inquired further how certain psychosocial variables can be associated with student spirituality and religiosity (S/R). The results revealed two significant variable traits associated with S/R: identity (psychosocial factors) and relational (psychosocial adjustment) variables. The results point to significant insights for the management of youth religious behaviour in general and of tertiary students in particular despite recent decline in levels of religiosity among the young.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Children s SpiritualitySame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207