The Influence of Choice Theory Anger Management Program (CTAMP) on the Ability of Prospective Psychological Counselors for Anger Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research is a quasi-experimental study with pretest-posttest-fallow up test and experiment-control group to investigate the influence of Choice Theory-based Anger Management Psychoeducation Program (CTAMP) on the ability of students of Department of Psychological Counseling and Guidance (PCG) for anger management. The Trait Anger-Anger Style Scale was used for the dependent variable. 40 students were identified as eligible to participate in the study based on the scores from subscales of STAS. Then a total of 18 volunteer students (14 females and 5 males) were identified that had time to participate in activities. The control group included 19 students (14 females, 5 males). The CTAMP was administrated to the experimental group for twelve weeks, and no procedures were performed for the control group. Then, reminder sessions were held for 3 more weeks for the control group and the final follow-up measurement was taken. The data was analyzed by SPSS 18 packet program. The t-test was performed to find the differences between the follow up pretest–follow up posttest scores in the experimental and control groups, and ANOVA was carried out to find the within-group differences for repeated measurements. At the end of CTAMP that lasted 12 weeks, it is observed that the trait anger-anger, anger-in and anger-out scores for the experimental group were reduced from the pretest to posttest, but the anger control scores were increased. At the end of follow-up sessions, the variance in the scores was similar.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".