MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613876683 · doi:10.1177/0829573517707906

Student–Teacher Relationships and Student Anxiety: Moderating Effects of Sex and Academic Achievement

2017· article· en· W2613876683 on OpenAlexafffund
Vanessa Kurdi, Isabelle Archambault

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of School Psychology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyAnxietyAcademic achievementDevelopmental psychologyAssociation (psychology)Clinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the influence of student–teacher relationships on children’s anxiety and its differential association according to children’s sex and academic achievement. The sample included 350 third- and fourth-grade students and their elementary school teachers. Results of multiple regression analysis indicated that student–teacher conflict at the beginning of the school year was associated with higher anxiety in students at the end of the year. The influence of conflict with teachers also varied for boys and girls, according to their academic achievement. Indeed, high-achieving girls reporting conflict with teachers presented more anxiety compared with boys and their low-achieving peers. This study highlights the influence of teachers on student anxiety, and brings attention to high-achieving girls, a group rarely considered at risk.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.338 · 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

Citations22
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of School PsychologySame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207