Effects of a Transactional Analysis Program on Adolescents’ Emotion Regulation
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
<p>Most adolescents are susceptible to exhibit emotional disorders due to rapid changes that occur during adolescence (Rudolph, 2002). To cope with such an issue, it is required to apply intervention programs in order to develop their competencies (Viner et al., 2012). In this study, the effect of transactional analysis on emotion regulation of 10th-grade female high school students has been examined by utilizing a quasi-experimental research (pre-test, post-test, and a control group design). Two classes have been chosen by cluster sampling and randomly assigned as the experimental and control groups. The Regulation of Emotion Questionnaire (Phillips &amp; power, 2007) was administrated. The transactional analysis program has been hold in eight sessions for the experimental group. Both groups were reexamined for follow-up a month later. The collected data were analyzed by Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA) indicates a significant increase in the functional emotion regulation strategies as well as a marked decrease in the dysfunctional emotion regulation strategies. The follow-up test also revealed an adequate stability. The implications of transactional analysis program will be discussed.</p>
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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