Acculturation of Erasmus students: Using the multidimensional individual difference acculturation model framework
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
The present self‐report survey study examines the psychophysical (how they feel) and sociocultural (how they do) adjustment of Erasmus students ( N = 223) in Spain and Germany. We adopted the comprehensive multidimensional individual difference acculturation framework to examine the acculturation process of Erasmus students. Using structural equation modeling, we tested specific hypotheses drawn from the framework, χ 2 (15) = 18.50, p = .24; χ 2 / df = 1.23, CFI = .99; and RMSEA = .03. In particular, we expected and found that students who reported high cultural and linguistic skills, high resilience, and a strong sense of identity had successful adaption in the host country. These students also reported high intercultural contact and low levels of psychophysical symptoms. Our findings highlight the relevance of core psychosocial factors in the adjustment of Erasmus students. The results have implications for universities accepting foreign students as we found successful adjustment will be hampered even for resilient students if they receive little social support from their university or limited mentoring to acquire appropriate skills.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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