MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966496102 · doi:10.5539/ies.v12n8p94

The Impact of a Play-Based Training Program on Reducing the Negative Effects of Students Abuse and Improving Their Self-Esteem

2019· article· en· W2966496102 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hisham Ali ALdmour

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBullying, Victimization, and Aggression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAnalysis of varianceSelf-esteemMultivariate analysis of varianceStatistical significanceClinical psychologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a play-based program on reducing the effects of student’s abuse and to improving their self-esteem. To achieve this goal, a sample was selected and composed of 60 male and female abused students. They were divided into two groups: control group and experimental group which both consisted of 30 students. The experimental group was divided into two groups: the first consisted of 15 male students, while the second consisted of 15 female students. The measure of exposure to abuse and the self-assessment scale were applied as an anterior and posterior test of both experimental and control groups. The experimental group was only exposed to training through the training program. After completing the data collection, the means and standard deviations of the performance of the experimental and control groups were calculated on the study scales. The multivariate variance analysis was also conducted to identify the impact of the training program on gender. The results of this study showed statistically significant differences at the mean level (α ≤ 0.05) between the performance mean of experimental and control groups. These differences were in favor of the experimental group that improved their level of self-esteem and decreased the level of exposure to abuse. The results also showed that there were no statistically significant differences at the level of significance (α ≤ 0.05) between the female and male performance means.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicBullying, Victimization, and AggressionFrench-language works237,207