MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553388317 · doi:10.55016/ojs/ajer.v54i4.55252

The Determinants of Life Satisfaction: High School Students in Regina

2008· article· en· W2553388317 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Henry P. H. Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Journal of Educational Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicYouth Development and Social Support
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Regina
KeywordsPsychologyDienerAcademic achievementMental healthLife satisfactionTracking (education)Peer pressureWell-beingCornerstonePromotion (chess)Developmental psychologySocial psychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Enhancing the quality of life of people is regarded as the cornerstone of health promotion, which seeks to empower people to improve their overall health and well-being (Diener, Suh, Lucas, & Smith, 1999; Epp, 1986; Raphael, 1996). High school students face myriad stressors and challenges in the academic environment. The high school environment has been depicted as one that has a large number of students, more rigid academic tracking, less emotional and instructional support from teachers, and greater emphasis on high academic achievement than that of a middle school.1 It is also an environment that exposes adolescents to greater pressures to engage in antisocial behavior and to more intense peer pressure (Barber & Olson, 2004; Isakon & Javis, 1999; Seidman & French, 1997). As earlier studies have shown that life satisfaction among children and adolescents is strongly related to their academic achievement (Baker, Terry, Beridger, & Winsor, 1997; Noddings, 2003) and mental health (Lewinsohn, Redner, & Seeley, 1991; Park, 2004), in this article I explore the level of life satisfaction and its correlates among high school students in Regina.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Journal of Educational ResearchSame topicYouth Development and Social SupportFrench-language works237,207